Suppr超能文献

一种用于检测可提取核抗原抗体的新型线性印迹免疫分析方法的评估。

Evaluation of a novel line-blot immunoassay for the detection of antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens.

作者信息

Damoiseaux J, Boesten K, Giesen J, Austen J, Tervaert J W Cohen

机构信息

Department of Clinical and Experimental Immunology, University Hospital Maastricht, P. O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005 Jun;1050:340-7. doi: 10.1196/annals.1313.036.

Abstract

We have evaluated the performance of a novel line-blot immunoassay (LIA; Mikrogen) and compared results with those obtained by CIE (in-house), ELISA (Pharmacia Diagnostics), and FEIA (Pharmacia Diagnostics). Sera from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients (n = 123), systemic sclerosis patients (n = 25), and healthy controls (n = 40) were analyzed for the presence of antibodies to RNP, Sm, SSA, SSB, CENP-B, Scl-70, and Jo-1. Reading of LIA results, as compared with a cutoff control, was performed by automatic analysis of the test strips. Because LIA enables recognition of separate subunits of RNP (68, A, and C), Sm (B and D), and SSA (52 and 60), at least two of the RNP antigens and either one of the Sm or SSA antigens should be detected for considering the test RNP, Sm, or SSA-positive, respectively. LIA had the highest sensitivity in patients with autoimmune connective tissue diseases: 131 specificities (not PO, PCNA, or histones), as compared with ELISA (121), FEIA (119), and CIE (80). However, LIA revealed three positive reactions in healthy controls; other assays were completely negative. LIA is better than CIE, but similar to ELISA and FEIA, in terms of detecting systemic sclerosis-associated antibodies (CENP-B and Scl-70). Furthermore, LIA had the highest sensitivity (17.9%) for the SLE-specific anti-Sm antibodies, as compared with ELISA (11.4%), CIE (8.1%), and FEIA (5.7%). Finally, anti-SSA antibodies were far more prevalent by LIA in the systemic sclerosis samples because of anti-SSA52 reactivity. The clinical relevance of the latter finding remains to be determined. In conclusion, LIA is suitable for routine evaluation of autoantibodies to extractable nuclear antigens.

摘要

我们评估了一种新型线性印迹免疫分析法(LIA;Mikrogen公司)的性能,并将结果与免疫电泳(CIE,内部方法)、酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA,Pharmacia Diagnostics公司)和荧光酶免疫测定法(FEIA,Pharmacia Diagnostics公司)所获结果进行了比较。分析了系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)患者(n = 123)、系统性硬化症患者(n = 25)和健康对照者(n = 40)的血清中抗核糖核蛋白(RNP)、史密斯(Sm)、干燥综合征A抗原(SSA)、干燥综合征B抗原(SSB)、着丝粒蛋白B(CENP - B)、硬皮病70(Scl - 70)和组氨酰tRNA合成酶(Jo - 1)抗体的存在情况。与对照临界值相比,通过对试纸条进行自动分析来读取LIA结果。由于LIA能够识别RNP(68、A和C)、Sm(B和D)以及SSA(52和60)的不同亚基,因此,要分别判定检测RNP、Sm或SSA呈阳性,应至少检测到两种RNP抗原以及Sm或SSA抗原中的一种。LIA在自身免疫性结缔组织病患者中具有最高的敏感性:特异性为131(非抗聚核苷酸抗体、抗增殖细胞核抗原抗体或组蛋白抗体),而ELISA为121、FEIA为119、CIE为80。然而,LIA在健康对照者中显示出3个阳性反应;其他检测方法均为完全阴性。在检测系统性硬化症相关抗体(CENP - B和Scl - 70)方面,LIA优于CIE,但与ELISA和FEIA相似。此外,与ELISA(11.4%)、CIE(8.1%)和FEIA(5.7%)相比,LIA对SLE特异性抗Sm抗体的敏感性最高(17.9%)。最后,由于对SSA52的反应性,LIA检测到系统性硬化症样本中的抗SSA抗体更为普遍。这一发现的临床相关性仍有待确定。总之,LIA适用于对可提取核抗原自身抗体的常规评估。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验