首页> 外文期刊>Rheumatology >Diagnostic performance and validation of autoantibody testing in myositis by a commercial line blot assay.
【24h】

Diagnostic performance and validation of autoantibody testing in myositis by a commercial line blot assay.

机译:通过商品线印迹测定法对肌炎中自身抗体检测的诊断性能和验证。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Serological testing for myositis-specific or associated autoantibodies [myositis-specific antibody (MSA) and myositis-associated antibody (MAA)] is useful for the diagnosis of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). However, available assays are neither standardized nor validated. The objective is to evaluate the accuracy of a commercial line blot assay for myositis diagnosis. METHODS: IgG antibodies against Jo-1, PL-7, PL-12, PM/Scl, Ku, Mi-2 and Ro52 antigens were detected by a line blot and in-house RNA immunoprecipitation or immunoblot. We tested sera from 208 IIM patients, 50 healthy subjects and 180 control patients (11 non-autoimmune myopathy, 23 muscular dystrophy, 11 UCTD, 68 SLE, 36 SSc, 22 SS and 9 arthropathy). RESULTS: MSAs or MAAs were detected in 98 (47%) out of the 208 IIM patients by line blot: anti-Jo-1 in 43 (21%), anti-PL-7 or anti-PL-12 in 8 (4%), anti-Mi-2 in 9 (4%), anti-PM/Scl in 9 (4%), anti-Ku in 10 (5%) and anti-Ro52 in 49 (24%). Overall specificity was: 100% for anti-Jo-1, anti-PL-7 or PL-12 and anti-PM/Scl; 96% for anti-Ku; 98% for anti-Mi-2; and 76% for anti-Ro52. In-house testing confirmed line blot results regarding anti-Jo-1, anti-PM/Scl and anti-Ku, while it was more accurate than line blot in detecting anti-Mi-2 (7 vs 4% sensitivity, 100 vs 98% specificity), and anti-aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase (anti-ARS) non-Jo-1 antibodies (11 vs 4% sensitivity, 97 vs 99% specificity). CONCLUSIONS: Line blot could be a suitable serological test in the diagnostic workup for myositis, and it represents a reliable alternative to more time-consuming procedures. Continuous effort is recommended in order to improve its accuracy.
机译:目的:针对肌炎特异性或相关自身抗体[肌炎特异性抗体(MSA)和肌炎相关抗体(MAA)]进行血清学检测对诊断特发性炎症性肌病(IIM)非常有用。但是,可用的测定既未标准化也未得到验证。目的是评估用于肌炎诊断的商品线印迹分析的准确性。方法:通过线印迹和内部RNA免疫沉淀或免疫印迹检测针对Jo-1,PL-7,PL-12,PM / Scl,Ku,Mi-2和Ro52抗原的IgG抗体。我们测试了208名IIM患者,50名健康受试者和180名对照患者(11例非自身免疫性肌病,23例肌营养不良症,11 UCTD,68 SLE,36 SSc,22 SS和9病)的血清。结果:通过线印迹法,在208名IIM患者中,有98名(47%)检测到MSA或MAA:43名(21%)的抗Jo-1、8名(8)的抗PL-7或抗PL-12(4) %),抗Mi-2占9(4%),抗PM / Scl占9(4%),抗Kuu占10(5%)和抗Ro52占49(24%)。总体特异性为:抗Jo-1,抗PL-7或PL-12和抗PM / Scl的特异性为100%;抗Ku的96%;抗Mi-2的98%;反Ro52占76%。内部测试证实了有关抗Jo-1,抗PM / Scl和抗Ku的线印迹结果,而在检测抗Mi-2方面比线印迹更准确(灵敏度为7%和4%,100%为98%)特异性)和抗氨酰基tRNA合成酶(抗ARS)非Jo-1抗体(敏感性分别为11%与4%,特异性97%与99%)。结论:线印迹法可能是肌炎诊断检查中的一种合适的血清学检测方法,它是较耗时的方法的可靠替代方法。建议不断努力以提高其准确性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号