期刊文献+

不同方法联合检测SLE患者血清中双链DNA抗体的性能评估 被引量:7

An assessment on diagnostic efficacy of different methods in combination for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibody in SLE patients
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨双链DNA抗体(dsDNA抗体)在常见自身免疫性疾病中的检出情况,评估不同方法联合检测系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)患者血清中dsDNA抗体的性能。方法使用ELISA法(ELISA1、ELISA2)和间接免疫荧光(IIF)法同时检测300例SLE和495例非SLE自身免疫疾病患者,以及300例健康体检者血清dsDNA抗体,分析单独和联合使用不同方法检测dsDNA抗体对SLE的诊断效能。结果 ELISA1、ELISA2和IIF在SLE患者中的检出率分别为42.3%、35.3%和38.0%,在非SLE自身免疫性疾病患者中最高检出率为1.2%,在健康体检人群中最高为0.3%。在SLE人群,3种方法中ELISA1和ELISA2法,ELISA1和IIF法,以及ELISA2和IIF法联合Kappa值分别为0.672、0.398和0.512(P<0.05)。而只有ELISA1和ELISA2间的检测率差异有统计学意义(P=0.003)。ELISA1、ELISA2和IIF法检测dsDNA抗体的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.708、0.672和0.687;ELISA1和IIF法的联合检出率最高为54.7%,AUC为0.764;3种方法同时检测,任何1种方法阳性即判断为阳性时,检出率为57.7%,AUC为0.781。结论联合使用ELISA法和IIF法,可以明显提升dsDNA抗体在SLE中的检出率。 Objective To investigate the prevalence of anti-dsDNA antibody in several autoimmune diseases,and evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of ELISA and indirect immunofluorescence(IIF)techniques for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibody in SLE patients.Methods Using commercially available kits based on ELISA(ELISA1,ELISA2)and IIF techniques simultaneously,serum anti-dsDNA antibody was determined in 300 SLE patients,495non-SLE autoimmune disease patients,and 300 health controls.The efficacy of anti-dsDNA antibody determined by one method or combined methods for the diagnostic of SLE patients was further evaluated.Results The positive rates of anti-dsDNA antibody in SLE patients detected by ELISA1,ELISA2 and IIF kit were42.3%,35.3% and 38.0% respectively.An utmost prevalence in the non-SLE patients and health controls were 1.2% and 0.3%respectively.In SLE patients,Kappa values of ELISA1 and ELISA2,ELISA1 and IIF,ELISA2 and IIF were 0.672,0.398,0.512respectively(P〈0.05).A significant difference was only observed between ELISA1 and ELISA2(P=0.003).The area under the receiver operating curve(AUC)of ELISA1,ELISA2 and IIF were 0.708,0.672 and 0.687 respectively,based on the result obtained from individual method.when ELISA1 kit and IIF kit were used in combination,the highest positive rate and AUC were 54.7%and0.764 in SLE patients.When three kinds of kits were used in combination,the highest positive rate and AUC were 57.7% and0.781.Conclusion Using ELISA and IIF in combination to detect anti-dsDNA antibody could greatly improve the efficacy for the diagnosis of SLE.
作者 田野 张云聪 冯珍如 闫惠平 张海萍 李佩 郑芳芳 聂秋燕 刘晴 王晓宁 谭延国 张国军 TIAN Ye ZHANG Yuncong FENG Zhenru YAN Huiping ZHANG Haiping LI Pei ZHENG Fangfang NIE Qiuyan LIU Qing WANG Xiaoning TAN Yanguo ZHANGGuojun(Center for Laboratory Diagnosis, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China Department of Clinical Laboratory, Fuxing Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100038, China Department of Clinical Laboratory ,First Hospital of Peking University ,Beijing 100034 ,China Center for Clinical Laboratory ,Youan Hospital ,Capital Medical University ,Beijing 100069 ,China)
出处 《检验医学与临床》 CAS 2016年第19期2697-2699,共3页 Laboratory Medicine and Clinic
基金 北京市卫生系统高层次卫生技术人才培养计划项目(2013-3-052) 首都临床特色应用研究(吴阶平)基金项目(Z1411020060000)
关键词 双链DNA抗体 酶联免疫吸附试验 间接免疫荧光法 系统性红斑狼疮 anti-dsDNA antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay indirect immunofluorescence systemic lupus erythematosus
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1Hochberg MC.Updating the American College of Rheu-matology revised criteria for the classification of systemiclupus erythematosus[J].Arthritis Rheum,1997,40(9):1725.
  • 2Yang JY,Oh EJ,Kim Y,et al.Evaluation of Anti-dsDNAantibody tests:Crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test,immunoblot,enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay,chemi-luminescence immunoassay[J].Korean J Lab Med,2010,30(6):675-684.
  • 3Antico A,Platzgummer S,Bassetti D,et al.Diagnosingsystemic lupus erythematosus:new-generation immunoas-says for measurement of anti-dsDNA antibodies are an ef-fective alternative to the Farr technique and the Crithidialuciliae immunofluorescence test[J].Lupus,2010,19(8):906-912.
  • 4史晓敏,阎振林,隋宝环,冯珍如.两种检测抗双链DNA抗体方法对系统性红斑狼疮的诊断价值比较[J].中华检验医学杂志,2012,35(8):742-745. 被引量:12
  • 5Giles BM,Boackle SA.Linking complement and anti-dsD-NA antibodies in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus ery-thematosus[J].Immunol Res,2013,55(1/2/3):10-21.
  • 6Wichainun R,Kasitanon N,Wangkaew S,et al.Sensitivityand specificity of ANA and anti-dsDNA in the diagnosisof systemic lupus erythematosus:a comparison using con-trol sera obtained from healthy individuals and patientswith multiple medical problems[J].Asian Pac J AllergyImmunol,2013,31(4):292-298.
  • 7Heidenreich U,Mayer G,Herold M,et al.Sensitivity andspecificity of autoantibody tests in the differential diagno-sis of lupus nephritis[J].Lupus,2009,18(14):1276-1280.
  • 8Nossent JC,Huysen V,Smeenk RJ,et al.Low avidity an-tibodies to dsDNA as a diagnostic tool[J].Ann RheumDis,1989,48(9):748-752.
  • 9Stamouli M,Skliris A,Reppa D,et al.Detection of antinu-clear antibodies (ANA),antibodies to double strandedDNA (anti-dsDNA)and antibodies to extractable nuclearantigens (anti-ENA)in Greek patients[J].Clin Lab,2013,59(3/4):283-291.
  • 10Arbuckle MR,Kohlhase KF.Development of anti-dsDNAautoantibodies prior to clinical diagnosis of systemic lupuserythematosus[J].Scand J Immun,2001,54(1/2):211-219.

二级参考文献26

  • 1Tan EM, Cohen AS, Fries JF, et al. The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Arthritis Rheum, 1982, 25 : 1271-1277.
  • 2Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum, 1997, 40:1725.
  • 3Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Jonsson R, et al. Classification criteria for Sjogren's syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group. Ann Rheum Dis ,2002,61:554-558.
  • 4Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, et al. The american rheumatism association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum, 1988, 31:315-324.
  • 5Subcommittee for Scleroderma Criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee. Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum, 1980, 23:581-586.
  • 6Jaekel HP, Trabandt A, Grobe N, et al. Anti-dsDNA antibody subtypes and anti-C1 q antibodies:toward a more reliable diagnosis and monitoring of systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis. Lupus, 2006, 15:335-345.
  • 7Chiaro TR, Davis KW, Wilson A, et al. Significant differences in the analytic concordance between anti-dsDNA IgG antibody assays for the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus-Implications for inter-laboratory testing. Clin Chim Acta, 2011, 412 : 1076-1080.
  • 8Biesen R, Dahnrich C, Rosemann A, et al. Anti-dsDNA-NcX ELISA : dsDNA-loaded nucleosomes improve diagnosis and monitoring of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Res Ther, 2011,13 : R26.
  • 9Janyapoon K, Jivakanont P, Surbrsing R, et al. Detection of anti- dsDNA by ELISA using different sources of antigens. Pathology, 2005, 37:63-68.
  • 10Werle E, Blazek M, Fiehn W. The clinical significance of measuring different anti-dsDNA antibodies by using the Farr assay, an enzyme immunoassay and a crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test. Lupus, 1992, 1:369-377.

共引文献14

同被引文献32

引证文献7

二级引证文献22

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部