Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21706294›Full record

ArticleRheumatology international2012

Nonrenal and renal activity of systemic lupus erythematosus: a comparison of two anti-C1q and five anti-dsDNA assays and complement C3 and C4.

Heikki Julkunen, Susanne Ekblom-Kullberg, Aaro Miettinen

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology international, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. HE4: a potential diagnostic biomarker in autoimmune diseases.Central-European journal of immunology · 2026
    Review
  5. Lupus nephritis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Lupus nephritis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Utilization of Biomarkers in Lupus Nephritis.Advances in chronic kidney disease · 2019
    Review
  17. Precision medicine in lupus nephritis: can biomarkers get us there?Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Heikki JulkunenDepartment of Rheumatology, Peijas Hospital, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Vantaa 01400, Finland. heikki.julkunen@kolumbus.fi
Susanne Ekblom-Kullberg
Aaro Miettinen
Helsinki University Hospital · FIPeijas Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Associations of different assays for antibodies to C1q (anti-C1q) and to dsDNA (anti-dsDNA) and of complements C3 and C4 with disease activity in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were studied. The clinical manifestations of 223 SLE patients were recorded, and the disease activity was assessed by the SLEDAI score. Anti-C1q were determined by two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and anti-dsDNA by a radioimmunoassay (RIA), a Crithidia immunofluorescence (IF) assay and three ELISA assays using human telomere DNA, plasmid DNA circles, or calf thymus DNA as antigens, respectively. Complement C3 and C4 were determined by nephelometry. Control sera were obtained from 98 blood donors. In patients with SLE, the prevalence of anti-C1q was 17-18% and that of anti-dsDNA was 36-69%. Anti-C1q, anti-dsDNA, and complement C3 and C4 correlated well with the overall activity of SLE (r = 0.323-0.351, 0.353-0.566, and -0.372-0.444, respectively; P < 0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for active lupus nephritis among SLE patients were 40-44, 92, 29, and 91-92% for anti-C1q and 48-68, 29-66, 11-16, and 86-91% for anti-dsDNA, respectively. Patients with active nephritis had higher levels of anti-C1q and lower levels of C3 and C4 than patients with inactive nephritis (P = 0.003-0.018). The corresponding associations of anti-dsDNA were somewhat weaker (P = 0.023-0.198). Hematological parameters reflecting disease activity correlated clearly better with anti-dsDNA and complement C3 and C4 than with anti-C1q. Anti-C1q is inferior to anti-dsDNA as a diagnostic test in SLE and in the evaluation of overall clinical activity of the disease. Anti-C1q together with complement C3 and C4 may offer useful additional information to monitor lupus nephritis activity. There are no practical differences between different assays for anti-C1q and anti-dsDNA.

Indexed as

ImmunoassayAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodiesBiomarkersComplement C1qComplement C3Complement C4DNAEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleFinlandFluorescent Antibody TechniqueAntibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodiesBiomarkersComplement C1qComplement C3Complement C4DNA

Identifiers

PMID21706294
OpenAlexW2005114930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.