This guide is for informational and educational purposes. It does not replace the advice, diagnosis, or treatment of a qualified physician. If you have received a positive ANA result, discuss it with your doctor in the context of your symptoms, exam, and other lab results.
Key Numbers to Know
5%
Of healthy adults have a positive ANA at 1:160 titer - by design of the assay[1]
~1%
Estimated prevalence of ANA-associated autoimmune disease in the general population[1]
4 in 5
In a low-risk, unselected population, most positive results at 1:160 are false positives[1]

What is the ANA test?

The antinuclear antibody (ANA) test detects antibodies in the blood that react against components in the cell nucleus. It is used as a screening test for a range of systemic autoimmune conditions, especially lupus, systemic sclerosis, Sjogren's disease, and mixed connective tissue disease. A positive ANA is part of the classification criteria used for lupus, but it is not diagnostic of any specific condition on its own.[1]

The test is most commonly performed using indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), which is more sensitive than automated multiplex assays and also reports a staining pattern alongside the titer. Some laboratories use automated solid-phase assays instead, which are more efficient but miss certain antibodies and do not report patterns. It is worth knowing which method your laboratory uses.[2,3]

A key limitation of this test: ANA cutoffs were designed to prioritize sensitivity, which means some healthy people will test positive. When ordered without a specific clinical concern, most positive results will be false positives. The test is most useful when there is a genuine reason to suspect a systemic autoimmune condition.[1,4]

What does the titer mean?

The ANA titer represents the highest dilution of serum at which fluorescence is still detected in at least half of the HEp-2 cells. Common titers reported are 1:40, 1:80, 1:160, 1:320, 1:640, and higher. Many laboratories use 1:160 as the threshold for a clearly positive result, though this varies by institution.[1]

Titer matters, but not in isolation. At 1:40, approximately 32% of healthy adults are positive. At 1:160, this falls to roughly 5%. At very high titers (1:640 and above), the probability of an underlying autoimmune condition increases, but a high titer alone is still not diagnostic of any disease. Some high-titer ANAs, such as those caused by anti-DFS70 antibodies, are actually associated with the absence of systemic autoimmune disease.[5,6]

Once a patient has been diagnosed with an ANA-associated autoimmune disease, repeating the ANA test is not useful. Changes in ANA titer do not reliably reflect disease activity and should not be used for monitoring. In lupus, tests such as anti-dsDNA and complement levels are often more useful for monitoring disease activity than repeating the ANA.[1]

What conditions are associated with a positive ANA?

ANAs are not specific to any single disease. They are found across a wide range of conditions, and in healthy people. The most clinically important autoimmune conditions associated with a positive ANA include:

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): ANA is positive in the great majority of patients with SLE and is part of the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria. A positive ANA is not sufficient for diagnosis on its own.[7]

Systemic sclerosis (SSc): ANA is positive in the large majority of SSc patients. Specific patterns, particularly centromere and nucleolar, help narrow down the SSc subtype.[1]

Sjogren's disease: ANA is positive in approximately 74% at 1:160. Importantly, some Sjogren's disease patients are ANA-negative by IIF but have anti-Ro/SSA antibodies, because the Ro60 antigen can be lost during slide preparation. ANA alone is not a reliable screening test for Sjogren's disease.[1,8]

Mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD): ANA is positive in virtually all patients with true MCTD. High-titer anti-U1 RNP producing a speckled pattern is the characteristic finding.[1]

Non-rheumatologic conditions also commonly cause a positive ANA. These include autoimmune thyroid and liver disease (such as Hashimoto's thyroiditis, primary biliary cholangitis, and autoimmune hepatitis); viral infections including EBV, HIV, hepatitis C, and parvovirus B19; inflammatory bowel disease; certain malignancies; and medications such as TNF inhibitors and minocycline.[9,10,11,12,13,14]

For patients: A positive ANA does not mean you have lupus. Studies that have followed patients referred with a positive ANA found that many did not end up with any systemic autoimmune disease. The wide variation in reported numbers reflects how differently the test is ordered across practices. When a diagnosis is made, the most common ones are SLE, drug-induced lupus, undifferentiated connective tissue disease, and systemic sclerosis.[9,15,10]

What does the staining pattern mean?

When ANA is detected by immunofluorescence, the lab reports a staining pattern alongside the titer. Patterns provide clues about which specific autoantibodies may be present and which conditions to consider, but they are not strong enough to make a diagnosis on their own. Specific antibody follow-up testing is almost always needed.[16,17]

Pattern Associated Antibodies Clinical Associations and Next Steps
Homogeneous
Most common pattern (36% of positive ANAs)[18]
Anti-dsDNA, anti-histone, anti-ssDNA Common but non-specific pattern seen in lupus and drug-induced lupus. Order anti-dsDNA (highly specific for lupus) and anti-histone (points toward drug-induced lupus). If anti-histone is positive without anti-dsDNA, review the medication list carefully.[19]
Fine speckled
20% of positive ANAs[18]
Anti-Ro/SSA, anti-La/SSB, anti-Scl-70, and others Broad pattern seen across lupus, Sjogren's disease, systemic sclerosis, and inflammatory myopathy. Order an ENA panel and let the clinical picture guide priority: sicca symptoms point toward Sjogren's disease, skin thickening toward SSc, proximal weakness or ILD toward myositis.[8]
Coarse speckled
1.5% of positive ANAs[18]
Anti-Sm, anti-U1 RNP Anti-Sm is highly specific for lupus. Anti-U1 RNP at high titer points toward MCTD - ask about Raynaud phenomenon, proximal weakness, and sclerodermatous features.[1]
Dense fine speckled (DFS70)
Anti-DFS70 (anti-LEDGF) In an otherwise healthy person with no symptoms of autoimmune disease, isolated anti-DFS70 is considered a reassuring finding and is not associated with systemic rheumatic disease, even at high titer. If symptoms are present, additional antibody testing is still needed since this pattern can obscure co-occurring antibodies.[5,6,22]
Centromere
3% of positive ANAs[18]
Anti-CENP-A, B, C Strongly associated with limited systemic sclerosis (lcSSc/CREST). Also seen in primary biliary cholangitis and Sjogren's disease. Evaluate for SSc features: Raynaud phenomenon, sclerodactyly, telangiectasias, calcinosis. Check LFTs and antimitochondrial antibody if liver disease is a concern. Refer to rheumatology for full evaluation.[23,24,25]
Nucleolar
1.4-17% of positive ANAs[18,26]
Anti-RNA Pol I/II/III, anti-PM-Scl, anti-U3-RNP, anti-Th/To, anti-Scl-70 Raises concern for systemic sclerosis. Order a scleroderma-specific antibody panel to narrow the subtype. Anti-RNA Pol III carries the highest risk of renal crisis and requires close blood pressure monitoring. Anti-Scl-70 (topoisomerase I) is associated with diffuse SSc and significant ILD risk. Refer to rheumatology promptly.[27,28,29]
Nuclear pore (discontinuous envelope)
Anti-Gp210 Rare pattern that is highly specific for primary biliary cholangitis when confirmed by solid-phase testing. Check LFTs and antimitochondrial antibody. Hepatology referral if PBC is suspected.[25]

When to order follow-up testing

A positive ANA by immunofluorescence should prompt specific antibody testing based on the pattern and the clinical picture. The pattern provides a starting point; the clinical features determine priority. A reasonable general approach:

For patients with a positive IIF ANA at 1:160 or above with suggestive symptoms: order disease-specific follow-up serologies, usually including anti-dsDNA plus an ENA panel (anti-Sm, anti-Ro/SSA, anti-La/SSB, anti-U1 RNP, anti-Scl-70/topoisomerase I). Add anticentromere or anti-RNA Pol III if the pattern suggests systemic sclerosis.[1]

For patients who are pregnant or planning pregnancy: anti-Ro/SSA and anti-La/SSB should be checked when clinically relevant. These antibodies cross the placenta and carry a risk of neonatal lupus and, in a small minority of pregnancies, congenital heart block.[1]

For a positive solid-phase ANA with a specific antibody identified: further IIF may not be necessary; the identified antibody guides next steps. However, if solid-phase ANA is negative and clinical suspicion remains high, order IIF ANA specifically, as solid-phase assays miss nucleolar antigens and some Ro60 positivity.[30,31]

ANA-negative does not exclude Sjogren's disease. Anti-Ro/SSA and anti-La/SSB can be present in patients whose IIF ANA is negative, because Ro60 antigen is sometimes lost during HEp-2 cell preparation. If Sjogren's disease is clinically suspected, order anti-Ro/SSA directly regardless of ANA result.[8,1]

When to refer to rheumatology

A positive ANA alone, without clinical features of autoimmune disease, does not require rheumatology referral. Referral is appropriate when there is genuine concern for a systemic autoimmune condition based on clinical features alongside the lab result. Indicators that warrant referral include: ANA at 1:160 or above with unexplained inflammatory or multisystem features (unexplained synovitis, photosensitive rash, serositis, unexplained cytopenias, or renal involvement); positive specific antibodies such as anti-dsDNA, anti-Sm, anti-Scl-70, anti-RNA Pol III, or anticentromere; or ANA with Raynaud phenomenon and other features of connective tissue disease.[1,4]

A brief note on children: ANA testing in pediatric patients should be reserved for situations where autoimmune disease is genuinely suspected, as the prevalence of positive ANA in healthy children is even higher than in adults. One exception is oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis, where a positive ANA at any titer is associated with higher uveitis risk and indicates the need for more frequent ophthalmologic screening.[32,33,34]

What to tell patients with a low-suspicion positive ANA

Ordering an ANA in a patient with low pretest probability is generally not recommended. When it happens and comes back positive, it is important to counsel patients clearly: at a dilution of 1:160, approximately 5% of healthy adults are positive even at this cutoff. If the prevalence of ANA-associated autoimmune disease in the general population is around 1%, then roughly 4 out of 5 positive results in an unselected population are false positives. ANA prevalence also increases with age and is twice as high in women as in men.[1,35]

Patients should be told that a positive ANA, in the absence of symptoms, does not mean they have or will develop an autoimmune disease. They should, however, be counseled to report new or worsening joint pain, rashes, unexplained fatigue, dry eyes or mouth, Raynaud phenomenon, or other systemic symptoms, since ANAs can precede clinical autoimmune disease by years or even decades.[36]

If specific antibody testing has already been done and results have come back, the next step is interpreting those results in clinical context.

Look up any positive antibody from your workup
Search individual antibodies or combine multiple positives to get a synthesized clinical interpretation
Open Antibody Interpreter
Primary Sources
  1. Tan EM, Feltkamp TE, Smolen JS, et al. Range of antinuclear antibodies in "healthy" individuals. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40:1601.
  2. Meroni PL, Schur PH. ANA screening: an old test with new recommendations. Ann Rheum Dis 2010; 69:1420.
  3. Agmon-Levin N, Damoiseaux J, Kallenberg C, et al. International recommendations for the assessment of autoantibodies to cellular antigens referred to as anti-nuclear antibodies. Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:17.
  4. Solomon DH, Kavanaugh AJ, Schur PH, American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Immunologic Testing Guidelines. Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 47:434.
  5. Watanabe A, Kodera M, Sugiura K, et al. Anti-DFS70 antibodies in 597 healthy hospital workers. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 50:892.
  6. Miyara M, Albesa R, Charuel JL, et al. Clinical phenotypes of patients with anti-DFS70/LEDGF antibodies in a routine ANA referral cohort. Clin Dev Immunol 2013; 2013:703759.
  7. Aringer M, Costenbader K, Daikh D, et al. 2019 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019; 71:1400.
  8. Pollock W, Toh BH. Routine immunofluorescence detection of Ro/SS-A autoantibody using HEp-2 cells transfected with human 60 kDa Ro/SS-A. J Clin Pathol 1999; 52:684.
  9. Shiel WC Jr, Jason M. The diagnostic associations of patients with antinuclear antibodies referred to a community rheumatologist. J Rheumatol 1989; 16:782.
  10. Abeles AM, Abeles M. The clinical utility of a positive antinuclear antibody test result. Am J Med 2013; 126:342.
  11. Petri M, Karlson EW, Cooper DS, Ladenson PW. Autoantibody tests in autoimmune thyroid disease: a case-control study. J Rheumatol 1991; 18:1529.
  12. Hansen KE, Arnason J, Bridges AJ. Autoantibodies and common viral illnesses. Semin Arthritis Rheum 1998; 27:263.
  13. Takase K, Horton SC, Ganesha A, et al. What is the utility of routine ANA testing in predicting development of biological DMARD-induced lupus and vasculitis? Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:1695.
  14. Vaz JL, Fernandes V, Nogueira F, et al. Infliximab-induced autoantibodies: a multicenter study. Clin Rheumatol 2016; 35:325.
  15. Slater CA, Davis RB, Shmerling RH. Antinuclear antibody testing. A study of clinical utility. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156:1421.
  16. Chan EK, Damoiseaux J, Carballo OG, et al. Report of the First International Consensus on Standardized Nomenclature of Antinuclear Antibody HEp-2 Cell Patterns 2014-2015. Front Immunol 2015; 6:412.
  17. Damoiseaux J, Andrade LEC, Carballo OG, et al. Clinical relevance of HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescent patterns: the International Consensus on ANA patterns (ICAP) perspective. Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 78:879.
  18. Vermeersch P, Bossuyt X. Prevalence and clinical significance of rare antinuclear antibody patterns. Autoimmun Rev 2013; 12:998.
  19. Haugbro K, Nossent JC, Winkler T, et al. Anti-dsDNA antibodies and disease classification in antinuclear antibody positive patients. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:386.
  20. Dellavance A, Viana VS, Leon EP, et al. The clinical spectrum of antinuclear antibodies associated with the nuclear dense fine speckled immunofluorescence pattern. J Rheumatol 2005; 32:2144.
  21. Bizzaro N, Tonutti E, Visentini D, et al. Antibodies to the lens and cornea in anti-DFS70-positive subjects. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007; 1107:174.
  22. Choi MY, Clarke AE, St Pierre Y, et al. The prevalence and determinants of anti-DFS70 autoantibodies in an international inception cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Lupus 2017; 26:1051.
  23. Bournia VK, Diamanti KD, Vlachoyiannopoulos PG, Moutsopoulos HM. Anticentromere antibody positive Sjogren's disease syndrome. Arthritis Res Ther 2010; 12:R47.
  24. Lee KE, Kang JH, Lee JW, et al. Anti-centromere antibody-positive Sjogren's disease syndrome: a distinct clinical subgroup? Int J Rheum Dis 2015; 18:776.
  25. Yang WH, Yu JH, Nakajima A, et al. Do antinuclear antibodies in primary biliary cirrhosis patients identify increased risk for liver failure? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004; 2:1116.
  26. Khan S, Alvi A, Holding S, et al. The clinical significance of antinucleolar antibodies. J Clin Pathol 2008; 61:283.
  27. Ho KT, Reveille JD. The clinical relevance of autoantibodies in scleroderma. Arthritis Res Ther 2003; 5:80.
  28. Steen VD. Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2005; 35:35.
  29. Hamaguchi Y, Fujimoto M, Matsushita T, et al. Common and distinct clinical features in adult patients with anti-aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase antibodies. PLoS One 2013; 8:e60442.
  30. Bruner BF, Guthridge JM, Lu R, et al. Comparison of autoantibody specificities between traditional and bead-based assays in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64:3677.
  31. Op De Beeck K, Vermeersch P, Verschueren P, et al. Antinuclear antibody detection by automated multiplex immunoassay in untreated patients at the time of diagnosis. Autoimmun Rev 2012; 12:137.
  32. Hilario MO, Len CA, Roja SC, et al. Frequency of antinuclear antibodies in healthy children and adolescents. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2004; 43:637.
  33. Somers EC, Monrad SU, Warren JS, et al. Antinuclear antibody prevalence in a general pediatric cohort from Mexico City. Clin Epidemiol 2017; 9:1.
  34. Deane PM, Liard G, Siegel DM, Baum J. The outcome of children referred to a pediatric rheumatology clinic with a positive antinuclear antibody test but without an autoimmune disease. Pediatrics 1995; 95:892.
  35. Satoh M, Chan EK, Ho LA, et al. Prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of antinuclear antibodies in the United States. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64:2319.
  36. Arbuckle MR, McClain MT, Rubertone MV, et al. Development of autoantibodies before the clinical onset of systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:1526.