ArticleArthritis research & therapy2011
Single-step autoantibody profiling in antiphospholipid syndrome using a multi-line dot assay.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thrombosis and Hyperinflammation in COVID-19 Acute Phase Are Related to Anti-Phosphatidylserine and Anti-Phosphatidylinositol Antibody Positivity.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Differences in Antiphospholipid Antibody Profile between Patients with Obstetric and Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Current Promising Biomarkers and Methods in the Diagnostics of Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Profiles of criteria and non-criteria anti-phospholipid autoantibodies are associated with clinical phenotypes of the antiphospholipid syndrome.Auto- immunity highlights · 2020Article
- Autoimmune Peripheral Neuropathies and Contribution of Antiganglioside/Sulphatide Autoantibody Testing.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2020Review
- Article
- Diagnostic insights into chronic-inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathies.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Anti-phospholipid IgG antibodies detected by line immunoassay differentiate patients with anti-phospholipid syndrome and other autoimmune diseases.Auto- immunity highlights · 2018Article
- Diagnosing antiphospholipid syndrome: 'extra-criteria' manifestations and technical advances.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2017Review
- Antiphospholipid antibodies detected by line immunoassay differentiate among patients with antiphospholipid syndrome, with infections and asymptomatic carriers.Arthritis research & therapy · 2016Article
- "New" antigenic targets and methodological approaches for refining laboratory diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome.Journal of immunology research · 2015Review
- Antiphospholipid antibodies in localized scleroderma: the potential role of screening tests for the detection of antiphospholipid syndrome.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2014Article
- Anti-hnRNP B1 (RA33) autoantibodies are associated with the clinical phenotype in Russian patients with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic sclerosis.Journal of immunology research · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) still remains a laboratory challenge due to the great diversity of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) and their significance regarding APS-diagnostic criteria.
methodsA multi-line dot assay (MLDA) employing phosphatidylserine (PS), phosphatidylinositol (PI), cardiolipin (CL), and beta2-glycoprotein I (β2 GPI) was used to detect aPL, immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) in 85 APS patients, 65 disease controls, and 79 blood donors. For comparison, anti-CL and anti-β2 GPI IgG and IgM were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
resultsThe level of agreement of both methods was good for anti-CL IgG, moderate for anti-CL IgM, very good for anti-β2 GPI IgG, and moderate for anti-β2 GPI IgM (kappa = 0.641, 0.507, 0.803 and 0.506, respectively). The frequency of observed discrepancies for anti-CL IgG (1.75%), anti-CL IgM (3.93%), anti-β2 GPI IgG (1.75%), and anti-β2 GPI IgM (0.87%) was low (McNemar test, P < 0.05, not-significant, respectively). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (+LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratios for at least one positive aPL antibody assessed by ELISA were 58.8%, 95.8%, 14.1, and 0.4, respectively, and for at least three positive aPl IgM and/or one positive aPL IgG by MLDA were 67.1%, 96.5%, 19.3, and 0.3, respectively. The frequency of IgM to PI, PS and CL, and combination of three or more aPL IgM detected by MLDA was significantly higher in APS patients with cerebral transient ischemia (P < 0.05, respectively).
conclusionsThe novel MLDA is a readily available, single-step, sensitive diagnostic tool for the multiplex detection of aPL antibodies in APS and a potential alternative for single aPL antibody testing by ELISA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.