Lyu Y K, Li Z A, A X R, Ma J D, Zhou J W, Wang L J
Department of Basic Medicine, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China.
Department of Clinical Laboratory, Qinghai Provincial People's Hospital, Xining 810007, China.
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023 Oct 10;103(37):2947-2951. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20230406-00550.
To investigate the diagnostic value of anti-Sa antibody and anti-carbonylated protein (CarP) antibody for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A retrospective selection of 180 patients with RA who came to Qinghai Provincial People's Hospital from September 2022 to February 2023. Grouped according to the Disease Activity Score of 28 joints (DAS28), 101 of them were patients with RA in high activity (RAH group), 24 males and 77 females, aged 18-79 (53.2±12.2), and 79 patients with RA in low activity (RAL group), 23 males and 56 females, aged 24-78 (49.0±12.9).A total of 90 patients with other autoimmune diseases in the hospital in the same period were choosed as the other immune disease group, and 90 healthy physical examiners were as the healthy control group. The levels of serum anti-Sa and anti-CarP antibodies were measured by ELISA, RF by immunoscattering turbidimetry, anti-CCP by chemiluminescence, and ESR by Weil's method in four groups of patients. The area under the subject operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was applied to assess the sensitivity and specificity of each index alone or in combination for the diagnosis of RA. In the RAH group, RAL group, other immune disease group, and healthy control group, the RF levels were 117.6 (61.0, 161.1), 92.7 (48.1, 92.7), 10.1 (5.3, 24.6), and 8.1 (6.0, 12.8) U/ml, anti-CCP antibody levels were 202.7 (67.1, 594.4), 212.9 (98.3, 416.2), 9.4 (6.6, 11.8), 1.9 (0.8, 4.9) U/ml, anti-Sa antibody levels were 305.3 (120.4, 614.9), 235.8 (161.6, 336.9), 123.9 (41.8, 240.5), 165.1 (71.1, 237.5) U/ml, and anti-CarP antibody levels were 11.7 (7.9, 21.6), 5.2 (3.3, 7.7), 5.1 (3.9, 6.5), and 5.8 (3.8, 7.5) mg/L, respectively, and their differences were statistically significant (all <0.001). The level of anti-CarP antibody was higher in the RAH group than in the RAL group (<0.001), and the difference in anti-Sa antibody was not statistically significant (>0.05). The critical value of anti-Sa antibody at 181.45 μg/L showed a sensitivity of 67.2%, specificity of 65.6% and AUC of 0.710 (95%: 0.645-0.775); The sensitivity was 52.8% and the specificity was 88.9% with an AUC of 0.706 (95%: 0.646-0.766) at a critical value of 7.98 U/ml for the anti-CarP antibody. The AUC for the combined RF, anti-CCP antibody and anti-CarP antibody assay was 0.986 (95%: 0.977-0.996). Anti-CarP antibody is clinically significant in distinguishing active RA. RF, anti-CCP, and anti-CarP antibodies can be detected together with high AUC results, suggesting the potential for developing an improved method for diagnosing RA.
探讨抗Sa抗体和抗羰基化蛋白(CarP)抗体对类风湿关节炎(RA)的诊断价值。回顾性选取2022年9月至2023年2月到青海省人民医院就诊的180例RA患者。根据28个关节疾病活动评分(DAS28)分组,其中101例为高活动度RA患者(RAH组),男24例,女77例,年龄18 - 79岁(53.2±12.2);79例为低活动度RA患者(RAL组),男23例,女56例,年龄24 - 78岁(49.0±12.9)。同期选取该院90例其他自身免疫性疾病患者作为其他免疫疾病组,90例健康体检者作为健康对照组。采用ELISA法检测四组患者血清抗Sa和抗CarP抗体水平,免疫散射比浊法检测RF,化学发光法检测抗CCP,魏氏法检测ESR。应用受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线下面积(AUC)评估各指标单独或联合诊断RA的敏感性和特异性。RAH组、RAL组、其他免疫疾病组和健康对照组的RF水平分别为117.6(61.0,161.1)、92.7(48.1,92.7)、10.1(5.3,24.6)和8.1(6.0,12.8)U/ml,抗CCP抗体水平分别为202.7(67.1,594.4)、212.9(98.3,416.2)、9.4(6.6,11.8)、1.9(0.8,4.9)U/ml,抗Sa抗体水平分别为305.3(120.4,614.9)、235.8(161.6,336.9)、123.9(41.8,240.5)、165.1(71.1,237.5)μg/L,抗CarP抗体水平分别为11.7(7.9,21.6)、5.2(3.3,7.7)、5.1(3.9,6.5)和5.8(3.8,7.5)mg/L,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.001)。RAH组抗CarP抗体水平高于RAL组(P<0.001),抗Sa抗体差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。抗Sa抗体临界值为181.45μg/L时,敏感性为67.2%,特异性为65.6%,AUC为0.710(95%CI:0.645 - 0.775);抗CarP抗体临界值为7.98U/ml时,敏感性为52.8%,特异性为88.9%,AUC为0.706(95%CI:0.646 - 0.766)。RF、抗CCP抗体和抗CarP抗体联合检测的AUC为0.986(95%CI:0.977 - 0.996)。抗CarP抗体在区分活动期RA方面具有临床意义。RF、抗CCP和抗CarP抗体联合检测AUC结果较高,提示开发改进的RA诊断方法具有潜力。