Nonspecific Binding in Immunoassays for Autoantibodies

  • Gunnar HouenEmail author
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1901)


Immunoassays are invaluable for detection and quantification of numerous analytes, including autoantibodies. However, human sera often yield high nonspecific binding in such assays, and this may result in false positive or sometimes false negative results. The causes of nonspecific binding are numerous and it correlates with inflammatory parameters. Since the results of autoantibody testing are used for diagnosis and treatment of autoimmune diseases, it is mandatory to be aware of all possible causes of nonspecific binding for each individual assay and to correct for it whenever possible. General guidelines for this are described in this chapter.

Key words

Autoantibodies Immunoassay Immunocytochemistry Immunohistochemistry False positive False negative Nonspecific binding Positive predictive value Negative predictive value Sensitivity Specificity 


  1. 1.
    Chan CP, Cheung YC, Renneberg R, Seydack M (2008) New trends in immunoassays. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 109:123–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borrebaeck CA (1997) Antibodies in diagnostics–from immunoassays to protein chips. Immunol Today 21:379–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnstone AP, Turner MW (eds) (1997) Immunochemistry 1 & 2. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wild D (ed) (2013) The immunoassay handbook. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bampton JL, Cawston TE, Kyle MV, Hazleman BL (1985) Measurement of rheumatoid factors by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and comparison with other methods. Ann Rheum Dis 44:13–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miles J, Charles P, Riches P (1998) A review of methods available for the identification of both organ-specific and non-organ-specific autoantibodies. Ann Clin Biochem 35:19–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehlers M, Allelein S, Schott M (2017) TSH-receptor autoantibodies: pathophysiology, assay methods, and clinical applications. Minerva Endocrinol 43(3):323–332. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rusak E, Chobot A, Krzywicka A, Wenzlau J (2016) Anti-parietal cell antibodies - diagnostic significance. Adv Med Sci 61:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Offermann N, Conrad K, Fritzler MJ, Fooke Achterrath M (2014) Development and validation of a lateral flow assay (LFA) for the determination of IgG-antibodies to Pr3 (cANCA) and MPO (pANCA). J Immunol Methods 403:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kawasaki E, Eisenbarth GS (2000) High-throughput radioassays for autoantibodies to recombinant autoantigens. Front Biosci 5:E181–E190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sinclair D (2006) Clinical and laboratory aspects of thyroid autoantibodies. Ann Clin Biochem 43:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jørgensen CS, Hansen KB, Jacobsen S, Halberg P, Ullman D, Mikkelsen TL, Weile B, Madsen MH, Heegaard NHH, Wiik A, Houen G (2005) Absence of high affinity calreticulin autoantibodies in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases and celiac disease. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 65:403–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Axelsen NH (ed) (1983) Handbook of immunoprecipitation-in-gel techniques. Blackwell Scientific Publ, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Güven E, Duus K, Lydolph MC, Jørgensen CS, Laursen I, Houen G (2014) Non-specific binding in solid phase immunoassays for autoantibodies correlates with inflammation markers. J Immunol Methods 403:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holm BE, Sandhu N, Tronstrøm J, Lydolph M, Trier NH, Houen G (2015) Species cross-reactivity of rheumatoid factors and implications for immunoassays. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 75:51–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jørgensen KM, Frederiksen JL, Nielsen CT, Houen G (2013) Detection of antibodies to the 20s proteasome by ELISA. J Immunoassay Immunochem 34:384–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buchwalow I, Samoilova V, Boecker W, Tiemann M (2011) Non-specific binding of antibodies in immunohistochemistry: fallacies and facts. Sci Rep 1:28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bolstad N, Warren DJ, Nustad K (2013) Heterophilic antibody interference in immunometric assays. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 27:647–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ward G, Simpson A, Boscato L, Hickman PE (2017) The investigation of interferences in immunoassay. Clin Biochem 50:1306–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friis T, Pedersen KB, Hougaard D, Houen G (2015) Immunocytochemical and immunohistochemical staining with peptide antibodies. Methods Mol Biol 1348:311–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hu B, Even C, Plagemann PG (1992) Immune complexes that bind to ELISA plates not coated with antigen in mice infected with lactate dehydrogenase-elevating virus: relationship to IgG2a- and IgG2b-specific polyclonal activation of B cells. Viral Immunol 5:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Williams AJ, Curnock R, Reed CR, Easton P, Rokni S, Bingley PJ (2010) Anti-BSA antibodies are a major cause of non-specific binding in insulin autoantibody radiobinding assays. J Immunol Methods 362:199–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bussolati G, Leonardo E (2008) Technical pitfalls potentially affecting diagnoses in immunohistochemistry. J Clin Pathol 61:1184–1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AutoimmunologyStatens Serum InstitutCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations