Browsing by Author "Dmochowski, Marian (6602554858)"

J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023; 37: 1118–1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.18931 In the version of this article initially published,1 Prof. Angelo Valerio Marzano affiliation was listed as “Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy”. His correct affiliations are the 3Dermatology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca′ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy and 56Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. The error has been corrected in the online version of the article. © 2023 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.

Background: The current standard in the serologic diagnosis of autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBD) is a multistep procedure sequentially applying different assays. In contrast, the BIOCHIP Mosaic technology combines multiple substrates for parallel analysis by indirect immunofluorescence. Methods: Sera from 749 consecutive, prospectively recruited patients with direct immunofluorescence–positive AIBD from 13 international study centers were analyzed independently and blinded by using (1) a BIOCHIP Mosaic including primate esophagus, salt-split skin, rat bladder, monkey liver, monkey liver with serosa, recombinant BP180 NC16A, and gliadin GAF3X, as well as HEK293 cells expressing recombinant desmoglein 1, desmoglein 3, type VII collagen, and BP230 C-terminus and (2) the conventional multistep approach of the Department of Dermatology, University of Lübeck. Results: In 731 of 749 sera (97.6%), specific autoantibodies could be detected with the BIOCHIP Mosaic, similar to the conventional procedure (725 cases, 96.8%). The Cohen κ for both serologic approaches ranged from 0.84 to 1.00. In 6.5% of sera, differences between the 2 approaches occurred and were mainly attributed to autoantigen fragments not present on the BIOCHIP Mosaic. Limitations: Laminin 332 and laminin γ1 are not represented on the BIOCHIP Mosaic. Conclusions: The BIOCHIP Mosaic is a standardized time- and serum-saving approach that further facilitates the serologic diagnosis of AIBD. © 2020 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.

Background Serologic diagnosis of autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) usually follows a sophisticated multistep algorithm. Objective We sought validation of a multivariant enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in the routine diagnosis of AIBD. Methods The multivariant ELISA comprising 6 recombinant immunodominant forms of major AIBD target antigens, ie, desmoglein 1, desmoglein 3, envoplakin, BP180, BP230, and type VII collagen was applied in: (1) a cohort of well-characterized AIBD (n = 173) and control sera (n = 130), (2) a prospective multicenter study with 204 sera from patients with newly diagnosed AIBD with positive direct immunofluorescence microscopy, and (3) a prospective monocenter study with 292 consecutive sera from patients with clinical suspicion of AIBD in comparison with the conventional multistep diagnostic algorithm. Results Concordant results in the multivariant ELISA compared with direct immunofluorescence microscopy were seen in 94% of patients with pemphigus and 71% of patients with pemphigoid (Cohen κ value, 0.95 and 0.66) and with the conventional multistep diagnostic approach in 91% of patients with pemphigus and 88% of patients with bullous pemphigoid and 93% of autoantibody-negative sera (Cohen κ, 0.95, 0.84, and 0.78). Limitations IgA autoantibodies and less common target antigens were not analyzed. Conclusions The multivariant ELISA is a practical, highly standardized, and widely available novel diagnostic tool for the routine diagnosis of AIBD. © 2016 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.

Background: Paraneoplastic pemphigus (PNP), also called paraneoplastic autoimmune multiorgan syndrome (PAMS), is a rare autoimmune disease with mucocutaneous and multi-organ involvement. PNP/PAMS is typically associated with lymphoproliferative or haematological malignancies, and less frequently with solid malignancies. The mortality rate of PNP/PAMS is elevated owing to the increased risk of severe infections and disease-associated complications, such as bronchiolitis obliterans. Objectives: These guidelines summarize evidence-based and expert-based recommendations (S2k level) for the clinical characterization, diagnosis and management of PNP/PAMS. They have been initiated by the Task Force Autoimmune Blistering Diseases of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology with the contribution of physicians from all relevant disciplines. The degree of consent among all task force members was included. Results: Chronic severe mucositis and polymorphic skin lesions are clue clinical characteristics of PNP/PAMS. A complete assessment of the patient with suspected PNP/PAMS, requiring histopathological study and immunopathological investigations, including direct and indirect immunofluorescence, ELISA and, where available, immunoblotting/immunoprecipitation, is recommended to achieve a diagnosis of PNP/PAMS. Detection of anti-envoplakin antibodies and/or circulating antibodies binding to the rat bladder epithelium at indirect immunofluorescence is the most specific tool for the diagnosis of PNP/PAMS in a patient with compatible clinical and anamnestic features. Treatment of PNP/PAMS is highly challenging. Systemic steroids up to 1.5 mg/kg/day are recommended as first-line option. Rituximab is also recommended in patients with PNP/PAMS secondary to lymphoproliferative conditions but might also be considered in cases of PNP/PAMS associated with solid tumours. A multidisciplinary approach involving pneumologists, ophthalmologists and onco-haematologists is recommended for optimal management of the patients. Conclusions: These are the first European guidelines for the diagnosis and management of PNP/PAMS. Diagnostic criteria and therapeutic recommendations will require further validation by prospective studies. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.