uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Four Anti-dsDNA Antibody Assays in Relation to Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Specificity and Activity
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Journal of Rheumatology, ISSN 0315-162X, E-ISSN 1499-2752, Vol. 42, no 5, 817-825 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective. Analysis of antibodies against dsDNA is an important diagnostic tool for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels are also used to assess disease activity. Herein, 4 assays were compared with regard to SLE specificity, sensitivity, and association with disease activity variables. Methods. Cross-sectional sera from 178 patients with SLE, of which 11 were followed consecutively, from a regional Swedish SLE register were analyzed for immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-dsDNA by bead-based multiplex assay (FIDIS; Theradig), fluoroenzyme-immunoassay (EliA; Phadia/Thermo Fisher Scientific), Crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test (CLIFT; ImmunoConcepts), and line blot (EUROLINE; Euroimmun). All patients with SLE fulfilled the 1982 American College of Rheumatology and/or the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC-12) classification criteria. Healthy individuals (n = 100), patients with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 95), and patients with primary Sjogren syndrome (n = 54) served as controls. Results. CLIFT had the highest SLE specificity (98%) whereas EliA had the highest sensitivity (35%). When cutoff levels for FIDIS, EliA, and EUROLINE were adjusted according to SLICC-12 (i.e., double the reference limit when using ELISA), the specificity and sensitivity of FIDIS was comparable to CLIFT. FIDIS and CLIFT also showed the highest concordance (84%). FIDIS performed best regarding association with disease activity in cross-sectional and consecutive samples. Fisher's exact test revealed striking differences between methods regarding associations with certain disease phenotypes. Conclusion. CLIFT remains a good choice for diagnostic purposes, but FIDIS performs equally well when the cutoff is adjusted according to SLICC-12. Based on results from cross-sectional and consecutive analyses, FIDIS can also be recommended to monitor disease activity.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 42, no 5, 817-825 p.
Keyword [en]
National Category
Rheumatology and Autoimmunity
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-255271DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.140677ISI: 000353779400013PubMedID: 25684763OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-255271DiVA: diva2:824795
Swedish Research Council, K2012-69X-14594-10-3, K2011-68X-20611-04-3
Available from: 2015-06-22 Created: 2015-06-15 Last updated: 2015-06-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Rönnelid, JohanWettero, Jonas
By organisation
Clinical Immunology
In the same journal
Journal of Rheumatology
Rheumatology and Autoimmunity

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 280 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link