Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20487535›Full record

ArticleArthritis research & therapy2010

Clinical and serological evaluation of a novel CENP-A peptide based ELISA.

Michael Mahler, Liesbeth Maes, Daniel Blockmans, Rene Westhovens, Xavier Bossuyt, Gabriela Riemekasten, Sandra Schneider, Falk Hiepe, Andreas Swart, Irmgard Gürtler and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 10 institutions in 6 countries.

Michael MahlerDr. Fooke Laboratorien, Mainstrasse 85, 41469 Neuss, Germany.
Liesbeth Maes
Daniel Blockmans
Rene Westhovens
Xavier Bossuyt
Gabriela Riemekasten
Sandra Schneider
Falk Hiepe
Andreas Swart
Irmgard Gürtler
Karl Egerer
Margrit Fooke
Marvin J Fritzler
E Ink (South Korea) · KRGerman Rheumatism Research Centre · DE3M (Germany) · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEDr. Franz Köhler Chemie (Germany) · DEGeneral Department of Preventive Medicine · VNKlinikum Aschaffenburg · DELukaskrankenhaus · DENova Medical (United States) · USUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP-38034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAnti-centromere antibodies (ACA) are useful biomarkers in the diagnosis of systemic sclerosis (SSc). ACA are found in 20 to 40% of SSc patients and, albeit with lower prevalence, in patients with other systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Historically, ACA were detected by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on HEp-2 cells and confirmed by immunoassays using recombinant CENP-B. The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel CENP-A peptide ELISA.

methodsSera collected from SSc patients (n=334) and various other diseases (n=619) and from healthy controls (n=175) were tested for anti-CENP-A antibodies by the novel CENP-A enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Furthermore, ACA were determined in the disease cohorts by IIF (ImmunoConcepts, Sacramento, CA, USA), CENP-B ELISA (Dr. Fooke), EliA CENP (Phadia, Freiburg, Germany) and line-immunoassay (LIA, Mikrogen, Neuried, Germany). Serological and clinical associations of anti-CENP-A with other autoantibodies were conducted in one participating centre. Inhibition experiments with either the CENP-A peptide or recombinant CENP-B were carried out to analyse the specificity of anti-CENP-A and -B antibodies.

resultsThe CENP-A ELISA results were in good agreement with other ACA detection methods. According to the kappa method, the qualitative agreements were: 0.73 (vs. IIF), 0.81 (vs. LIA), 0.86 (vs. CENP-B ELISA) and 0.97 (vs. EliA CENP). The quantitative comparison between CENP-A and CENP-B ELISA using 265 samples revealed a correlation value of rho=0.5 (by Spearman equation). The receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that the discrimination between SSc patients (n=131) and various controls (n=134) was significantly better using the CENP-A as compared to CENP-B ELISA (P<0.0001). Modified Rodnan skin score was significantly lower in the CENP-A negative group compared to the positive patients (P=0.013). Inhibition experiments revealed no significant cross reactivity of anti-CENP-A and anti-CENP-B antibodies. Statistically relevant differences for gender ratio (P=0.0103), specific joint involvement (Jaccoud) (P=0.0006) and anti-phospholipid syndrome (P=0.0157) between ACA positive SLE patients and the entire SLE cohort were observed.

conclusionsAnti-CENP-A antibodies as determined by peptide ELISA represent a sensitive, specific and independent marker for the detection of ACA and are useful biomarkers for the diagnosis of SSc. Our data suggest that anti-CENP-A antibodies are a more specific biomarker for SSc than antibodies to CENP-B. Furthers studies are required to verify these findings.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAutoantibodiesAutoantigensBiomarkersCase-Control StudiesCentromere Protein ACentromere Protein BChromosomal Proteins, Non-HistoneEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAutoantibodiesAutoantigensBiomarkersCENPA protein, humanCentromere Protein ACentromere Protein BChromosomal Proteins, Non-Histone

Identifiers

PMID20487535
PMCPMC2911886
OpenAlexW2103732215

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.