We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Laboratory Diagnosis and Clinical Profile of Anti-p200 Pemphigoid

Joost M. Meijer, MD1; Gilles F. H. Diercks, MD, PhD1; Enno Schmidt, MD, PhD2; Hendri H. Pas, PhD1; Marcel F. Jonkman, MD, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Center for Blistering Diseases, Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
2Department of Dermatology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(8):897-904. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.1099.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Anti-p200 pemphigoid is a rare subepidermal autoimmune blistering disease characterized by autoantibodies against a 200-kDa protein in the basement membrane zone. Anti-p200 pemphigoid is probably often misdiagnosed because of low availability of diagnostic assays and expertise and classified as bullous pemphigoid or epidermolysis bullosa acquisita.

Objective  To clinically characterize patients with anti-p200 pemphigoid, identified by using indirect immunofluorescence microscopy on skin substrates deficient in type VII collagen and laminin-332 (knockout analysis), to validate this technique by immunoblot with dermal extract, and to incorporate direct immunofluorescence serration pattern analysis in the diagnostic algorithm.

Design, Setting, and Participants  This was a retrospective study performed from January 2014 to June 2015 with biobank patient materials and clinical data for the period 1998 to 2015 from the single national referral center on autoimmune bullous diseases. Patients were selected based on a dermal side binding on 1-mol/L salt (sodium chloride)-split human skin substrate by indirect immunofluorescence microscopy, not diagnosed epidermolysis bullosa acquisita or anti–laminin-332 mucous membrane pemphigoid.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Indirect immunofluorescence microscopy knockout analysis was performed and diagnosis of anti-p200 confirmed by immunoblot with dermal extract. Clinical, histological, and immunological findings were registered. Autoantibodies against laminin γ1 were determined by immunoblot.

Results  Twelve patients with anti-p200 pemphigoid (7 male and 5 female; mean age, 66.6 years) were identified using the indirect immunofluorescence microscopy knockout analysis. Direct immunofluorescence microscopy showed a linear n-serrated IgG deposition pattern along the basement membrane zone in 9 of 11 patients. The diagnosis was confirmed by immunoblot showing autoantibodies against 200-kDa protein in dermal extract in 12 of 12 patients. Autoantibodies against recombinant laminin γ1 were detected by immunoblot in 8 of 12 patients. Remarkable similarities were seen in clinical features with predominantly tense blisters on hands and feet, resembling dyshidrosiform pemphigoid. Mucosal involvement was seen in 6 (50%) of the patients.

Conclusions and Relevance  Predominance of blisters on hands and feet may be a clinical clue to the diagnosis of anti-p200 pemphigoid. Direct immunofluorescence microscopy serration pattern analysis and indirect immunofluorescence microscopy knockout analysis are valuable additional techniques to facilitate the diagnosis of anti-p200 pemphigoid.

Figures in this Article


Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
Clinical Manifestations of Anti-p200 Pemphigoid

A and B, Tense blisters and desquamation of a palm and sole, respectively, resembling dyshidrosiform pemphigoid. C, Vesicles on the tongue. D, Circumscript monomorphic tense vesicles and blisters on the arm.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
Indirect Immunofluorescence (IIF) Microscopy Knockout Analysis on Skin Substrate of a Patient With Epidermolysis Bullosa Completely Deficient of Type VII Collagen (RDEB) or Laminin-332 (JEB)

A and B, Test results for anti-laminin-332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP). In absence of the target antigen, serum of a patient with anti–laminin-332 MMP is negative (neg) on laminin-332 deficient skin (A). C and D, Test results for epidermolysis bullosa acquisita (EBA). Similarly, serum of a patient with EBA is negative on type VII collagen deficient skin (D). E and F, Test results for anti-p200 pemphigoid. Serum of a patient with anti-p200 pemphigoid is positive (pos) on both skin substrates, therefore excluding autoantibodies to solely laminin-332 and type VII collagen.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 3.
Algorithm for Diagnosis of Anti-p200 Pemphigoid in Patients With Subepidermal Autoimmune Bullous Diseases (sAIBDs) and IgG Autoantibodies Binding to the Dermal Side on SSS by (IIF) Microscopy

The differential diagnosis includes anti-p200 pemphigoid, anti–laminin-332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) and epidermolysis bullosa acquisita (EBA). To distinguish between these sAIBDs, final diagnosis can be confirmed by using 1 or a combination of available laboratory techniques: immunoblotting with appropriate substrates, immunoprecipitation, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), fluorescence overlay antigen mapping or IIF knockout analysis on type VII collagen and laminin-332–deficient skin. Reactivity to laminin γ1 is seen in 70% to 90% of patients with anti-p200 pemphigoid and can be used as a diagnostic marker. ECM indicates extracellular matrix; IF, immunofluorescence; IIF, indirect immunofluorescence; SSS, salt (sodium chloride)-split skin.

aDiagnosis of EBA can be made by direct immunofluorescence (DIF) microscopy alone, based on a linear u-serrated deposition pattern of IgG along the basement membrane zone (BMZ).

Graphic Jump Location




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles