Cell lines that express membrane-associated DNA for anti-DNA antibody detection

Tonutti, Elio; Blasone, Nadia; Visentini, Daniela; Poletto, Monica; Villalta, Danilo; Tozzoli, Renato; Bizzaro, Nicola

doi:10.1515/cclm.2008.105

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However HLA genes contribute with no more than 40% of the risk, undetermined non-HLA genes probably being the stronger determinant of CD susceptibility (18) . In the last 25 years the emergence of progressively more reliable serological markers, such as anti-gliadin, anti-endomysium (30) , and anti-transglutaminase antibodies (29) allowed the precocious diagnosis of atypical or even silent form of the disease and greatly contributed to the widespread acknowledging that the prevalence of CD was higher than previously thought. Presently CD may be considered a global public health problem and one of the most common chronic auto-immune conditions since its estimated figures in Western countries varies between 1% and 2.5% (9,19) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of celiac disease among first degree relatives of Brazilian celiac patients

Almeida

Gandolfi

Modelli

et al. 2008

Arq. Gastroenterol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of celiac disease among first degree relatives of Brazilian celiac patients

Almeida

Gandolfi

Modelli

et al. 2008

Arq. Gastroenterol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Are anti-nucleosome antibodies a better diagnostic marker than anti-dsDNA antibodies for systemic lupus erythematosus? A systematic review and a study of metanalysis

Bizzaro

Villalta

Giavarina

et al. 2012

Autoimmunity Reviews

126

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anti-dsDNA Testing Specificity for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Systematic Review

Orme¹,

Voreck

Aksouh

et al. 2022

The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Autoantibody specificity in autoimmune diseases is variable due to each patient’s individual spectrum of autoantibodies and the inherent differences between detection methods and tests. Since false-positive results have downstream consequences, we conducted a comprehensive assessment of anti-double stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) specificity from published studies of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods A systematic review (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects) identified cross-sectional or case-control studies published January 2004 to August 2019, reporting anti-dsDNA test accuracy data in SLE. Study quality was assessed using Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies, version 2. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate specificity by test method or named test where feasible. Results Thirty studies were included covering 43 different tests. The Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT) and fluorescence enzyme immunoassay methods are likely to be ≥ 90% specific (Euroimmun 97.8% (95% CI 96.2%–98.7%) 4 studies; EliA 94.7% (95% CI 91.7%–96.7%), 6 studies; CLIFT 98.7% (95% CI 96.7%–99.5%), 8 studies/7 tests]. For other test methods, specificity was not fully demonstrated to be ≥ 90% and/or the control group included healthy patients possibly overestimating specificity. More studies are required for NOVA Lite [96.0% (95% CI 87.2%–98.9%), 5 studies], chemiluminescence immunoassays [92.3% (95% CI 83.6%–96.6%), 6 studies/4 tests], multiplex immunoassays [89.3% (95% CI 86.1%–91.8%), 4 studies/2 tests], and Farr fluorescent immunoassays (no estimate, 2 studies). Specificity data reported for Farr radioimmunoassays [93.8% (95% CI 85.4–97.5%), 11 studies, 9 tests] and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays [93.4% (95% CI 89.9%–95.7%), 15 studies/16 tests] lacked consistency. Conclusion Anti-dsDNA testing shows considerable variation in test specificity, with potential impact on the management of SLE patients. This review may help laboratory specialists and clinicians choose and interpret the appropriate anti-dsDNA test for their setting.

show abstract

Cell lines that express membrane-associated DNA for anti-DNA antibody detection

Abstract: The results of our study indicate that cmDNA tests may be used as screening tests in patients with suspected SLE. The anti-nucleosome test offers the best diagnostic accuracy overall and can play an important role in the serological diagnosis of SLE.

Cited by 5 publications

References 27 publications

Prevalence of celiac disease among first degree relatives of Brazilian celiac patients

Prevalence of celiac disease among first degree relatives of Brazilian celiac patients

Are anti-nucleosome antibodies a better diagnostic marker than anti-dsDNA antibodies for systemic lupus erythematosus? A systematic review and a study of metanalysis

Anti-dsDNA Testing Specificity for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About