Kadlubowski M, Jackson M, Yap P L, Neill G
Department of Transfusion Medicine, Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh.
J Clin Pathol. 1991 Mar;44(3):246-50. doi: 10.1136/jcp.44.3.246.
Four commercially available kits (three enzyme linked immunosorbent assays and one modified Farr radioimmunoassay) were compared for their ability to detect specifically autoantibodies to double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) using 66 patient sera. This was assessed by comparing the results of the kits with those from an ELISA specifically measuring antibodies against highly purified dsDNA, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), native DNA and histones. The RIA and two of the ELISAs seemed equally efficient at detecting antibodies to dsDNA, but all three also detected anti-ssDNA (the RIA being particularly bad for this). The need for highly purified dsDNA was clearly shown. The results obtained with one ELISA did not correlate with any variable investigated in this study. A total of 220 sera were assayed with the IDS RIA, of which 130 were recorded as positive. Of these, 50 sera seemed to contain no identifiable autoantibodies. This very high false positive rate may be due, at least in part, to precipitation of nonspecifically bound labelled DNA.
使用66份患者血清,对四种市售试剂盒(三种酶联免疫吸附测定法和一种改良的Farr放射免疫测定法)检测抗双链DNA(dsDNA)自身抗体的特异性能力进行了比较。通过将试剂盒的结果与专门用于测量针对高度纯化的dsDNA、单链DNA(ssDNA)、天然DNA和组蛋白的抗体的酶联免疫吸附测定法的结果进行比较来评估。放射免疫测定法和两种酶联免疫吸附测定法在检测抗dsDNA抗体方面似乎同样有效,但这三种方法也都检测到了抗ssDNA(放射免疫测定法在这方面表现尤其差)。这清楚地表明了对高度纯化的dsDNA的需求。用一种酶联免疫吸附测定法获得的结果与本研究中调查的任何变量均无相关性。用IDS放射免疫测定法共检测了220份血清,其中130份记录为阳性。在这些血清中,50份似乎不含可识别的自身抗体。这种非常高的假阳性率可能至少部分是由于非特异性结合的标记DNA的沉淀所致。