• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

用于检测抗双链DNA抗体的五种商业检测方法的评估:三种利什曼原虫间接免疫荧光检测试剂盒和两种酶免疫检测试剂盒。

Evaluation of five commercial assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies: three Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test kits and two enzyme immunoassay kits.

作者信息

Viriyataveekul Ronnachai, Kobkitjaroen Jaruda, Jaiyen Jintana, Kongkriengdach Siriporn, Potprasart Sumalee

出版信息

J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Feb;97(2):220-4.

PMID:24765902
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

There are various methods for anti-dsDNA detection. Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA) are the most commonly used at present. A number of CLIFT and EIA kits are commercially available. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of three commercial CLIFT kits, two commercial EIA kits, and their combinations for anti-dsDNA detection.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

One hundred thirty nine sera sent for anti-dsDNA testing were investigated. Three commercial CLIFT kits (kit C1, C2, and C3) and two commercial EIA kits (kit E1 and E2) were evaluated. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated. The gold standard methods were the consensus results of all five kits, together with the clinical diagnosis when the results of five kits were discrepant.

RESULTS

Of 139 sera investigated, 94 (67.6%) sera showed concordant results for all five kits and 45 (32.4%) sera showed discordant results. Thirty-five of those 45 patients (77.7%) were diagnosed as SLE. Sensitivities and specificities of the kits were as follows, Cl 82.1% and 94%, C2 46.4% and 100%, C3 78.6% and 98.8%, E1 71.4% and 94%, and E2 75% and 93.8%, respectively. Kit C3 yielded the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity (177.4%). Sensitivities and specificities of the combinations of CLIFT and EIA kits were as follows, C1 + E1 89.3% and 90.4%, C1 + E2 98.2% and 87.9%, C2 + E1 73.2% and 94%, C2 + E2 82.1% and 92.8%, C3 + E1 85.7% and 94%, and C3 + E2 94.6% and 91.6%, respectively. The combination of kit C3 and E2 yielded the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity (186.2%).

CONCLUSION

Kit C3 was the assay of choice for anti-dsDNA detection. EIA kits yielded lower sensitivities and specificities than two of three CLIFT kits. Therefore, they should not be used as the first assay for anti-dsDNA screening. When CLIFT and EIA assays were combined, sensitivities were increased Kit E2 helped CLIFT kits to detect more SLE cases than E1.

摘要

目的

抗双链DNA(dsDNA)检测有多种方法。目前最常用的是利什曼原虫间接免疫荧光试验(CLIFT)和酶免疫测定(EIA)。市面上有许多CLIFT和EIA试剂盒可供选择。本研究的目的是评估三种商用CLIFT试剂盒、两种商用EIA试剂盒及其组合用于抗dsDNA检测的诊断性能。

材料与方法

对139份送检抗dsDNA检测的血清进行研究。评估了三种商用CLIFT试剂盒(试剂盒C1、C2和C3)和两种商用EIA试剂盒(试剂盒E1和E2)。计算敏感性和特异性。金标准方法是所有五种试剂盒的一致结果,以及当五种试剂盒结果不一致时的临床诊断结果。

结果

在139份研究血清中,94份(67.6%)血清在所有五种试剂盒中结果一致,45份(32.4%)血清结果不一致。这45例患者中有35例(77.7%)被诊断为系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)。各试剂盒的敏感性和特异性如下:C1为82.1%和94%,C2为46.4%和100%,C3为78.6%和98.8%,E1为71.4%和94%,E2为75%和93.8%。试剂盒C3的敏感性和特异性之和最高(177.4%)。CLIFT和EIA试剂盒组合的敏感性和特异性如下:C1 + E1为89.3%和90.4%,C1 + E2为98.2%和87.9%,C2 + E1为73.2%和94%,C2 + E2为82.1%和92.8%,C3 + E1为85.7%和94%,C3 + E2为94.6%和91.6%。试剂盒C3和E2的组合敏感性和特异性之和最高(186.2%)。

结论

试剂盒C3是抗dsDNA检测的首选检测方法。EIA试剂盒的敏感性和特异性低于三种CLIFT试剂盒中的两种。因此,它们不应作为抗dsDNA筛查的首选检测方法。当CLIFT和EIA检测方法联合使用时,敏感性会提高。试剂盒E2比E1能帮助CLIFT试剂盒检测出更多的SLE病例。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of five commercial assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies: three Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test kits and two enzyme immunoassay kits.用于检测抗双链DNA抗体的五种商业检测方法的评估:三种利什曼原虫间接免疫荧光检测试剂盒和两种酶免疫检测试剂盒。
J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Feb;97(2):220-4.
2
Diagnosing systemic lupus erythematosus: new-generation immunoassays for measurement of anti-dsDNA antibodies are an effective alternative to the Farr technique and the Crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test.诊断系统性红斑狼疮:新一代免疫测定法用于检测抗 dsDNA 抗体是替代 Farr 技术和克氏锥虫免疫荧光试验的有效方法。
Lupus. 2010 Jul;19(8):906-12. doi: 10.1177/0961203310362995. Epub 2010 Feb 23.
3
Clinical significance of ELISA positive and immunofluorescence negative anti-dsDNA antibody.酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA)阳性而免疫荧光法阴性的抗双链DNA抗体的临床意义
Clin Chim Acta. 2007 May 1;380(1-2):182-5. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2007.02.010. Epub 2007 Feb 15.
4
[Evaluation of Anti-dsDNA antibody tests: Crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test, immunoblot, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, chemiluminescence immunoassay].抗双链DNA抗体检测的评估:利什曼原虫免疫荧光试验、免疫印迹法、酶联免疫吸附测定、化学发光免疫测定
Korean J Lab Med. 2010 Dec;30(6):675-84. doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2010.30.6.675.
5
Clinical implications of discordance between anti-dsDNA antibodies by multiplex flow immunoassay and assay in a multiethnic racial cohort of patients with SLE.在一个多民族种族的 SLE 患者队列中,多重流式免疫分析法与 ELISA 法检测抗 dsDNA 抗体不一致的临床意义。
Lupus Sci Med. 2023 Nov;10(2). doi: 10.1136/lupus-2023-001012.
6
High sensitive detection of double-stranded DNA autoantibodies by a modified Crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test.通过改良的鲁氏锥虫免疫荧光试验对双链DNA自身抗体进行高灵敏度检测。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Sep;1173:180-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04801.x.
7
Selective detection of autoimmune antibodies to single- and double-stranded DNA by enzyme immunoassay.通过酶免疫测定法对单链和双链DNA自身抗体进行选择性检测。
Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2003 Spring;33(2):142-8.
8
Analytical variability in the determination of anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies: the strong need of a better definition of the old and new tests.抗双链 DNA 抗体测定的分析变异性:对新旧检测方法进行更好定义的强烈需求。
Immunol Res. 2018 Jun;66(3):340-347. doi: 10.1007/s12026-018-8992-9.
9
Performance analysis of automated evaluation of Crithidia luciliae-based indirect immunofluorescence tests in a routine setting - strengths and weaknesses.常规环境下基于鲁氏锥虫间接免疫荧光试验的自动化评估的性能分析——优势与不足
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 Nov 27;56(1):86-93. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2017-0326.
10
Low diagnostic and predictive value of anti-dsDNA antibodies in unselected patients with recent onset of rheumatic symptoms: results from a long-term follow-up Scandinavian multicentre study.未选择的近期出现风湿症状患者中抗 dsDNA 抗体的诊断和预测价值较低:来自长期随访的斯堪的纳维亚多中心研究结果。
Scand J Rheumatol. 2013;42(4):311-6. doi: 10.3109/03009742.2013.765032. Epub 2013 Mar 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical implications of discordance between anti-dsDNA antibodies by multiplex flow immunoassay and assay in a multiethnic racial cohort of patients with SLE.在一个多民族种族的 SLE 患者队列中,多重流式免疫分析法与 ELISA 法检测抗 dsDNA 抗体不一致的临床意义。
Lupus Sci Med. 2023 Nov;10(2). doi: 10.1136/lupus-2023-001012.
2
The performance of different anti-dsDNA autoantibodies assays in Chinese systemic lupus erythematosus patients.不同抗 dsDNA 自身抗体检测方法在系统性红斑狼疮患者中的表现。
Clin Rheumatol. 2018 Jan;37(1):139-144. doi: 10.1007/s10067-017-3771-x. Epub 2017 Jul 25.
3
Clinical comparison of QUANTA Flash dsDNA chemiluminescent immunoassay with four current assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies.
QUANTA Flash dsDNA 化学发光免疫分析与四种当前检测抗 dsDNA 自身抗体方法的临床比较。
J Immunol Res. 2015;2015:902821. doi: 10.1155/2015/902821. Epub 2015 Jan 5.