ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2012
Comparative study of immunofluorescent antinuclear antibody test and line immunoassay detecting 15 specific autoantibodies in patients with systemic rheumatic disease.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frequency of extractable nuclear antigen seropositivity among individuals seronegative for antinuclear antibodies on indirect immunofluorescence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Anti-Ro-52 antibody is a risk factor for recurrence in interstitial lung disease with positive anti-aminoacyl tRNA synthetase antibody: a single-center, retrospective observational study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Observational
- Review
- Evaluation of a New Multiparametric Microdot Array-Based Immunoassay Panel for Systemic Autoimmune Disease Diagnosis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison study of bead-based and line-blot multiplex ANA immunoassays in the diagnosis of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Article
- Detection of Anti-Extractable Nuclear Antigens in Patients with Systemic Rheumatic Disease via Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay and Its Clinical Utility.Yonsei medical journal · 2020Article
- Relationships among Antibodies against Extractable Nuclear Antigens, Antinuclear Antibodies, and Autoimmune Diseases in a Brazilian Public Hospital.Autoimmune diseases · 2018Article
- Evaluation of an Automated Screening Assay, Compared to Indirect Immunofluorescence, an Extractable Nuclear Antigen Assay, and a Line Immunoassay in a Large Cohort of Asian Patients with Antinuclear Antibody-Associated Rheumatoid Diseases: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Journal of immunology research · 2018Article
- A review of the role and clinical utility of anti-Ro52/TRIM21 in systemic autoimmunity.Rheumatology international · 2017Review
- Emerging technologies in autoantibody testing for rheumatic diseases.Arthritis research & therapy · 2017Review
- Confirmation of anti-DFS70 antibodies is needed in routine clinical samples with DFS staining pattern.Central-European journal of immunology · 2016Article
- Current concepts and future directions for the assessment of autoantibodies to cellular antigens referred to as anti-nuclear antibodies.Journal of immunology research · 2014Review
- Highlights on novel technologies for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B.Clinical & developmental immunology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Based on the currently proposed algorithms, antibodies specificities (sp-ANAs) are identified mainly in samples positive for fluorescent antinuclear antibodies (FANA) screening tests. The purpose of the present study was to compare diagnostic performances of FANA and line immune assay (LIA) detecting 15 sp-ANAs in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases (SRD). In 948 sera from the patients with SRD (n = 590) and non-SRD (n = 358), we evaluated the fluorescent patterns and intensities in the FANA test, and compared the FANA results with sp-ANAs against nRNP, Sm, SS-A, Ro52, SS-B, Scl-70, PM/Scl, Jo-1, CENP B, PCNA, dsDNA, nucleosome, histone, ribosomal-P, and M2. The sensitivity and specificity was 75.9% and 52.5% of FANA test and 62.0% and 84.4% of sp-ANAs test for SRD detection. The overall agreement between FANA and sp-ANAs results was 69.2% (Kappa coefficient; 0.404). According to the clinical diagnosis, the levels of agreement varied from 33.3% to 83.1%. The positive predictive values of each FANA pattern for the detection of sp-ANAs were less than 50% except for the discrete speckled pattern (91.7%). The 1:100 intensity of FANA as well as the monoreactivity of LIA, anti-SSA(-)/anti-Ro52(+), or FANA(-)/sp-ANAs(+) was associated with non-SRD. Antibodies against ribosomal-P or PCNA were specific for systemic lupus eryhthematosus. This study highlights the need for careful interpretation of FANA test results to assess sp-ANAs and the application of sp-ANAs tests including less-common autoantibodies. In patients with clinical suspicion of SRD, screening with both FANA and sp-ANAs tests could improve diagnostic efficiency.
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.