COMPARISON OF TWO ANTI-DOUBLE-STRAND-DNA ANTIBODIES ASSAYS : CRITHIDIA LUCILIAE SUBSTRATE READ BY AUTOMATED FLUORESCENT MICROSCOPE VERSUS CHEMILUMINESCENT IMMUNOASSAY

Author(s):  
Thibaut Belmondo
1998 ◽  
Vol 188 (5) ◽  
pp. 985-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanno B. Richards ◽  
Minoru Satoh ◽  
Melody Shaw ◽  
Claude Libert ◽  
Valeria Poli ◽  
...  

Pristane induces a lupus-like syndrome in nonautoimmune mice characterized by the development of glomerulonephritis and lupus-associated autoantibodies. This is accompanied by overproduction of interleukin (IL)-6, a cytokine linked with autoimmune phenomena. The goal of this study was to evaluate the role of IL-6 in autoantibody production in pristane-induced lupus. BALB/cAn IL-6–deficient (−/−) and –intact (+/+) mice were treated with pristane or phosphate-buffered saline, and autoantibody production was evaluated. Pristane induced high levels of immunoglobulin (Ig)G anti-single-stranded DNA, –double-stranded (ds)DNA, and -chromatin antibodies in IL-6+/+, but not IL-6−/− mice by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. High titer IgG anti-dsDNA antibodies also were detected in sera from +/+, but not −/−, mice by Crithidia luciliae kinetoplast staining. The onset of IgG anti-dsDNA antibody production in +/+ mice occurred >5 mo after pristane treatment, well after the onset of nephritis, suggesting that these antibodies are not directly responsible for inducing renal disease. In contrast to anti-DNA, the frequencies of anti-nRNP/Sm and anti-Su antibodies were similar in pristane-treated IL-6−/− and IL-6+/+ mice. However, levels were higher in the +/+ group. These results suggest that IgG anti-DNA and chromatin antibodies in pristane-treated mice are strictly IL-6 dependent, whereas induction of anti-nRNP/Sm and Su autoantibodies is IL-6 independent. The IL-6 dependence of anti-DNA, but not anti-nRNP/Sm, may have implications for understanding the patterns of autoantibody production in lupus. Anti-DNA antibodies are produced transiently, mainly during periods of disease activity, whereas anti-nRNP/Sm antibody levels are relatively insensitive to disease activity. This may reflect the differential IL-6 dependence of the two responses.


2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Beigel ◽  
Fabian Schnitzler ◽  
Rüdiger Paul Laubender ◽  
Simone Pfennig ◽  
Maria Weidinger ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Infantino ◽  
Francesca Meacci ◽  
Chelsea Bentow ◽  
Peter Martis ◽  
Maurizio Benucci ◽  
...  

Introduction. The objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT). Methods. In the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study. Results. The overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT. Conclusion. Significant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT.


Rheumatology ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. G. TIPPING ◽  
R. R. C. BUCHANAN ◽  
A. G. RIGLAR ◽  
W. J. DIMECH ◽  
G. O. LITTLEJOHN ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 72 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A915.3-A916
Author(s):  
M. I. Sarbu ◽  
P. Rubio Muñoz ◽  
T. C. Salman Monte ◽  
J. G. Lopéz Velandia ◽  
J. Pérez-Ruiz ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document