A service evaluation of the diagnostic testing for mucous membrane pemphigoid in a UK oral medicine unit.
ELISA
HLA
diagnosis
immunofluorescence
mucous membrane pemphigoid
Journal
Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology
ISSN: 1600-0714
Titre abrégé: J Oral Pathol Med
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 8911934
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
26
05
2020
accepted:
02
06
2020
pubmed:
10
6
2020
medline:
21
11
2020
entrez:
10
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an uncommon bullous disease typically involving the oral cavity. The most commonly used laboratory test for the diagnosis of MMP is direct immunofluorescence (DIF) on fresh perilesional tissue; however, the sensitivity of this test may be hampered by technical difficulties. Immune-serological investigations can also be employed to render a diagnosis. The purpose of this paper was to present an evaluation of diagnostic testing for MMP within an Oral Medicine Unit in UK. A retrospective analysis of the medical records was undertaken for patients who had undergone biopsy and DIF testing from January 2016 to December 2018. Parameters analysed included clinical presentation, histopathological features, DIF, salt-split skin indirect immunofluorescence, ELISA anti-BP180 and BP 230 and HLA-DQB1*03:01 findings. Thirty patients (23 females and 7 males, mean age 66.8 years old) were diagnosed with MMP through a combination of histopathology and serological testing. Sixteen patients (53%) were DIF positive, whereas in 14 (47%), MMP diagnosis was achieved using immune-serologic tests. HLA DQB1*03:01 status was undertaken in 15 DIF-positive and 12 DIF-negative patients, and HLA DQB1*03:01 was found in 73% and 58% of the cases, respectively. This service evaluation has shown that when DIF is informative, it remains the gold standard technique for diagnosis of MMP. However, we have also highlighted the value of serological testing for increasing diagnostic yield for patients with suspected MMP and the potential for HLA DQB1*03:01 as an adjunctive test for the evaluation of MMP.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an uncommon bullous disease typically involving the oral cavity. The most commonly used laboratory test for the diagnosis of MMP is direct immunofluorescence (DIF) on fresh perilesional tissue; however, the sensitivity of this test may be hampered by technical difficulties. Immune-serological investigations can also be employed to render a diagnosis. The purpose of this paper was to present an evaluation of diagnostic testing for MMP within an Oral Medicine Unit in UK.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective analysis of the medical records was undertaken for patients who had undergone biopsy and DIF testing from January 2016 to December 2018. Parameters analysed included clinical presentation, histopathological features, DIF, salt-split skin indirect immunofluorescence, ELISA anti-BP180 and BP 230 and HLA-DQB1*03:01 findings.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirty patients (23 females and 7 males, mean age 66.8 years old) were diagnosed with MMP through a combination of histopathology and serological testing. Sixteen patients (53%) were DIF positive, whereas in 14 (47%), MMP diagnosis was achieved using immune-serologic tests. HLA DQB1*03:01 status was undertaken in 15 DIF-positive and 12 DIF-negative patients, and HLA DQB1*03:01 was found in 73% and 58% of the cases, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This service evaluation has shown that when DIF is informative, it remains the gold standard technique for diagnosis of MMP. However, we have also highlighted the value of serological testing for increasing diagnostic yield for patients with suspected MMP and the potential for HLA DQB1*03:01 as an adjunctive test for the evaluation of MMP.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
687-692Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/N005872/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Schmidt E, Zillikens D. Pemphigoid diseases. Lancet. 2013;381(9863):320-332.
Chan LS, Ahmed AR, Anhalt GJ, et al. The first international consensus on mucous membrane pemphigoid: definition, diagnostic criteria, pathogenic factors, medical treatment, and prognostic indicators. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138(3):370-379.
Di Zenzo G, Carrozzo M, Chan LS. Urban legend series: mucous membrane pemphigoid. Oral Dis. 2014;20(1):35-54.
Calabresi V, Carrozzo M, Cozzani E, et al. Oral pemphigoid autoantibodies preferentially target BP180 ectodomain. Clin Immunol. 2007;122(2):207-213.
Yunis JJ, Mobini N, Yunis EJ, et al. Common major histocompatibility complex class II markers in clinical variants of cicatricial pemphigoid. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994;91(16):7747-7751.
Drouet M, Delpuget-Bertin N, Vaillant L, et al. HLA-DRB1 and HLA-DQB1 genes in susceptibility and resistance to cicatricial pemphigoid in French Caucasians. Eur J Dermatol. 1998;8(5):330-333.
Setterfield J, Theron J, Vaughan RW, et al. Mucous membrane pemphigoid: HLA-DQB1*0301 is associated with all clinical sites of involvement and may be linked to antibasement membrane IgG production. Brit J Dermatol. 2001;145(3):406-414.
Carrozzo M, Fasano M, Broccoletti R, et al. HLA-DQB1 alleles in Italian patients with mucous membrane pemphigoid predominantly affecting the oral cavity. Brit J Dermatol. 2001;145(5):805-808.
Hübner F, Setterfield J, Recke A, et al. HLA alleles in British Caucasians with mucous membrane pemphigoid. Eye (Lond). 2018;32(9):1540-1541.
Ahmed AR, Hombal SM. Cicatricial Pemphigoid. Int J of Dermatol. 1986;25(2):90-96.
Syn WK, Ahmed MM. Esophageal involvement in cicatricial pemphigoid: a rare cause of dysphagia. Dis Esophagus. 2004;17(2):180-182.
Gamm DM, Harris A, Mehran RJ, Wood M, Foster CS, Mootha VV. Mucous membrane pemphigoid with fatal bronchial involvement in a seventeen-year-old girl. Cornea. 2006;25(4):474-478.
Schoeffler A, Roth B, Causeret A, Kanitakis J, Faure M, Claudy A. Vulvar cicatricial pemphigoid of childhood. Pediatr Dermatol. 2004;21(1):51-53.
Fueston JC, Adams BB, Mutasim DF. Cicatricial pemphigoid-induced phimosis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;46(5 suppl):S128-S129.
Venning VA, Frith PA, Bron AJ, Millard PR, Wojnarowska F. Mucosal involvement in bullous and cicatricial pemphigoid: a clinical and immunopathological study. Br J Dermatol. 1988;118(1):7-15.
Leonard JN, Hobday CM, Haffenden GP, et al. Immunofluorescent studies in ocular cicatricial pemphigoid. Br J Dermatol. 1988;118(2):209-217.
Mehra T, Guenova E, Dechent F, et al. Diagnostic relevance of direct immunofluorescence in ocular mucous membrane pemphigoid. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2015;13(2):1268-1274.
Sano SM, Quarracino MC, Aguas SC, et al. Sensitivity of direct immunofluorescence in oral diseases. Study of 125 cases. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008;13(5):E287-E291.
Carrozzo M, Cozzani E, Broccoletti R, et al. Analysis of antigens targeted by circulating IgG and IgA antibodies in patients with mucous membrane pemphigoid predominantly affecting the oral cavity. J Periodontol. 2004;75(10):1302-1308.
Hayakawa T, Furumura M, Fukano H, et al. Diagnosis of oral mucous membrane pemphigoid by means of combined serologic testing. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014;117(4):483-496.
Cozzani E, Di Zenzo G, Calabresi V, et al. Autoantibody profile of a cohort of 78 Italian patients with mucous membrane pemphigoid: correlation between reactivity profile and clinical involvement. Acta Derm Venereol. 2016;96(6):768-773.
Izumi K, Nishie W, Mai Y, et al. Detection of mucous membrane pemphigoid autoantibodies by full-length BP180 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Dermatol Sci. 2017;88(2):247-248.
Carrozzo M, Arduino PG, Baldovino S, et al. Minocycline in combination with mycophenolate mofetil in oral mucous membrane pemphigoid. Eur J Dermatol. 2008;18(2):198-200.
Shimanovich I, Nitz JM, Zillikens D. Multiple and repeated sampling increases the sensitivity of direct immunofluorescence testing for the diagnosis of mucous membrane pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77(4):700-705.
Carrozzo M. A reappraisal of diagnostic criteria for mucous membrane pemphigoid. J Oral Pathol Med. 2009;38(1):160.
Bresler SC, Bavarian R, Granter SR, Woo SB. Direct immunofluorescence is of limited utility in patients with low clinical suspicion for an oral autoimmune bullous disorder. Oral Dis. 2020;26(1):81-88.
Carey B, Joshi S, Abdelghani A, Mee J, Andiappan M, Setterfield J. The optimal oral biopsy site for diagnosis of mucous membrane pemphigoid and pemphigus vulgaris. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182(3):747-753.
Fukuda A, Himejima A, Tsuruta D, et al. Four cases of mucous membrane pemphigoid with clinical features of oral lichen planus. Int J Dermatol. 2016;55(6):657-665.
Benzaquen M, Suter VGA, Gschwend M, Feldmeyer L, Borradori L. Mucous membrane pemphigoid of the oral lichen type: a retrospective analysis of 16 cases. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019;33(5):e205-e207.
Gilvetti C, Collyer J, Gulati A, Barrett AW. What is the optimal site and biopsy technique for the diagnosis of oral mucosal autoimmune blistering disease? J Oral Pathol Med. 2019;48(3):239-243.