Abstract:<a href="/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/a-0914-0535">Comparison of a Bridge Immunoassay with Two Bioassays for Thyrotropin Receptor Antibody Detection and Differentiation</a>Dear Editor,We wish to share our concern with significant aspects of the scientific design, analysis, and validity of the work "Comparison of a Bridge Immunoassay with Two Bioassays for Thyrotropin Receptor Antibody Detection and Differentiation" by S. Allelein, T. Diana, M. Ehlers, M. Kanitz, D. Hermsen, M. Schott, and G. J. Kahaly [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0001">1</a>], which affect the reliability of the authors' conclusions. In this publication, the authors sought to compare the FDA-cleared IMMULITE® 2000/2000 XPi TSI immunoassay with the FDA-cleared ThyretainTM TSI Reporter BioAssay and the non-FDA-cleared Thyretain TBI Blocking Reporter BioAssay on a set of patients, including those diagnosed with Graves' disease (GD) and Hashimoto's thyroiditis (HT). The authors purport to determine the presence of blocking antibodies using the non-FDA-cleared Thyretain TBI bioassay. The authors find that "[b]oth assays were highly sensitive for detecting TSHR-Ab in hyperthyroid patients with untreated GD". Both TSI assays were positive for all ten untreated GD patients. The authors also found that both TSI assays correctly report negative results in all healthy patients. The clinical specificity of the two TSI assays was evaluated using 78 patients with HT, non-autoimmune nodular thyroid disease, and thyroid cancer. The IMMULITE TSI assay demonstrated a clinical specificity of 97.4% (76/78) compared to 93.6% (73/78) for the Thyretain TSI assay. These findings agree with previous third-party evaluations of the IMMULITE TSI assay showing 98–100% clinical sensitivity and 98.2–99.9% clinical specificity for the differential diagnosis of GD [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0002">2</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0003">3</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0004">4</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0005">5</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0006">6</a>].However, the authors suggest that since two treated Graves' disease patients were negative in the Thyretain TSI assay but positive in both the IMMULITE TSI assay and the non-FDA-cleared Thyretain TBI bioassay, the IMMULITE TSI assay can be described as not specific for TSH receptor stimulating autoantibodies. The authors' interpretation of the Thyretain TSI assay results is incorrect because of the experimental design flaws and incomplete analysis of the data. A plausible explanation of the data is that the Thyretain TSI assay results for the two treated GD patients are false negative, and the IMMULITE TSI assay results are true positive.First, the authors do not mention the explicit warning against the use of the Thyretain TSI assay to test GD patients undergoing various drug treatments. The Thyretain TSI Reporter BioAssay package insert [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0007">7</a>] unambiguously states that "[t]he TSI Reporter assay is intended for the qualitative detection of TSI. It is not intended for use in monitoring a patient's treatment. The effects of various drug therapies on the performance of this Kit have not been established" [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0007">7</a>]. Therefore, the validity of the negative Thyretain TSI results for the two treated GD patients is in question.Second, the Thyretain TSI Reporter BioAssay manufacturer also clearly states in the package insert that "[a] negative result does not exclude the possibility of the presence of TSI. Results of the test should be interpreted in conjunction with information available from other clinical information, such as physical symptoms and thyroid hormone testing, as recommended by the American Thyroid Association (ATA)" [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0007">7</a>]. Thus, the authors' claim that there are no stimulating antibodies in the samples of the two treated GD patients is unfounded because it is based on negative Thyretain TSI results and ignores the manufacturer's recommendation based on ATA guidelines to interpret the test result in conjunction with other clinical information.Third, the authors fail to mention or consider in their analysis that the Thyretain TSI assay reports net stimulating activity as documented in previous publications by some of the authors of this study [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0008">8</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0009">9</a>]. Although blocking antibodies do not generate a signal in the Thyretain TSI assay, blocking antibodies, when present, interfere with that assay's measurement of stimulating antibodies [<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0008">8</a>][<a href="#R2019-09-0291-0009">9</a>]. As such, the assay reports "zero" net stimulating activity for samples containing equal activity of stimulating and blocking antibodies. For example, a 2017 article by Diana et al. showed that a sample with 4 ng/ml stimulati -Abstract Truncated-

False diagnosis of recurrent thyroid carcinoma: the importance of testing for heterophile antibodies

A Rare Case of Falsely Elevated High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T Due to Antibody Interference and a Literature Review

Heterophilic antibody interference with TSH measurement on different immunoassay platforms

Falsely elevated T 3 due to interference of anti-T 3 autoantibodies: a case report

Life after thyroid cancer: the role of thyroglobulin and thyroglobulin antibodies for postoperative follow-up

Clinical Value of Different Responses of Serum Thyroglobulin to Recombinant Human Thyrotropin in the Follow-Up of Patients with Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma

Influence of Thyroglobulin (Tg) Autoantibodies on Tg levels Measured by Different Methodologies: (IMA, LC-MS/MS and RIA)

Role of thyroid ultrasound combined with thyroglobulin in the diagnosis of postoperative recurrence of thyroid cancer

Interferences With Thyroid Function Immunoassays: Clinical Implications and Detection Algorithm

Multiple immunoassay interference in a patient with falsely elevated calcitonin

Is a second recombinant human thyrotropin stimulation test useful? The value of postsurgical undetectable stimulated thyroglobulin level at the time of remnant ablation on clinical outcome

A Negative Thyretain TSI Bioassay Result does not Exclude the Possibility of the Presence of TSI

Anti-thyroglobulin antibodies do not significantly increase the risk of finding iodine avid metastases on post-radioactive iodine ablation scan in low-risk thyroid cancer patients

An Unusual Case of False Positive

Diagnostic, Theranostic and Prognostic Value of Thyroglobulin in Thyroid Cancer

Data-Driven Thyroglobulin Cutoffs for Low- and Intermediate-Risk Thyroid Cancer Follow-Up: ITCO Real-World Analysis

B-085 Optimizing Thyroglobulin Antibody Interference Thresholds to Minimize Turn-around Time

Sufficiency of a Single Negative Thyroglobulin Standard for Judging the Success of Ablation in Low- and Intermediate-risk Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Pre-operative thyroglobulin measurement for thyroid cancer risk of recurrence and response to therapy

A Novel Thyroglobulin Immunoassay Using the Specimen-Pretreatment Process Improves the Accuracy of Thyroglobulin Measurements in Anti-Thyroglobulin Positive Specimens

The impact of thyroglobulin antibody on efficacy of131I ablation in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma