ArticleJournal of immunology research2015
Clinical comparison of QUANTA Flash dsDNA chemiluminescent immunoassay with four current assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies.
Article in Journal of immunology research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances and pitfalls in anti-double-stranded DNA autoantibody detection and interpretation.World journal of biological chemistry · 2026Review
- Analytical Comparison of an In-House FARR Fluorescence Immunoassay with Commercial Analytical Assays for the Detection of Anti-Double-Stranded DNA Antibodies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison of Five Assays for the Detection of Anti-dsDNA Antibodies and Their Correlation with Complement Consumption.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Clinical evaluation of the novel digital liquid chip method for anti-dsDNA detection in SLE.Lupus science & medicine · 2025Article
- Proteomic analyses reveal cystatin c is a promising biomarker for evaluation of systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical proteomics · 2023Article
- Performance of two multiplex flow cytometric assays for antibody detection in Egyptian patients.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Anti-double stranded DNA antibodies: A rational diagnostic approach in limited-resource settings.Practical laboratory medicine · 2022Article
- Anti-dsDNA antibodies in the classification criteria of systemic lupus erythematosus.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2022Article
- Comparisons of Anti-dsDNA Antibody Detection Methods by Chemiluminescent Immunoassay and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Update and clinical management of anti-DNA auto-antibodies.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2021Review
- Assessment of antinuclear antibodies (ANA): National recommendations on behalf of the Croatian society of medical biochemistry and laboratory medicine.Biochemia medica · 2021Review
- Analytical variability in the determination of anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies: the strong need of a better definition of the old and new tests.Immunologic research · 2018Article
- Article
- Autoantibodies Associated With Connective Tissue Diseases: What Meaning for Clinicians?Frontiers in immunology · 2018Review
- Article
- The performance of different anti-dsDNA autoantibodies assays in Chinese systemic lupus erythematosus patients.Clinical rheumatology · 2018Article
- Chemiluminescent immunoassay technology: what does it change in autoantibody detection?Auto- immunity highlights · 2017Article
- Next-Generation Autoantibody Testing by Combination of Screening and Confirmation-the CytoBead® Technology.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2017Review
- Performance Characteristics of Different Anti-Double-Stranded DNA Antibody Assays in the Monitoring of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Journal of immunology research · 2017Article
- Simultaneous comprehensive multiplex autoantibody analysis for rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis.Medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT).
methodsIn the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study.
resultsThe overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT.
conclusionSignificant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT.
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.