ArticleClinical rheumatology2018
The performance of different anti-dsDNA autoantibodies assays in Chinese systemic lupus erythematosus patients.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Clinical implications of discordance between anti-dsDNA antibodies by multiplex flow immunoassay andLupus science & medicine · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Belimumab in Chinese Lupus Patients: A Multicenter, Real-World Observational Study.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Performance of two multiplex flow cytometric assays for antibody detection in Egyptian patients.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Comparative analysis of contemporary anti-double stranded DNA antibody assays for systemic lupus erythematosus.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Comparison study of bead-based and line-blot multiplex ANA immunoassays in the diagnosis of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Article
- Detection of epitopes in systemic lupus erythematosus using peptide microarray.Molecular medicine reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the performance of different commercial anti-dsDNA autoantibody assays, including multiplex-based immunoassay (Bio-Plex), Farr radioimmunoassay (Farr), ELISA, chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA), and Crithidia Luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT) in Chinese patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). SLE patients (n = 119) as well as healthy controls (n = 200) and disease controls (n = 100) were recruited, and serum anti-dsDNA autoantibodies were detected by Bio-Plex, Farr, two ELISA assays (Medical & Biological Laboratories-ELISA, EUROIMMU-ELISA), CLIA, and a standard CLIFT. The correlation of anti-dsDNA autoantibody levels to SLE disease activity was calculated, and the specificity and sensitivity of these methods were measured by receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. In ROC curve analysis, Bio-Plex showed the largest area under the curve (AUC) over other assays. Cutoff adjustment according to ROC enhanced the performance of all quantitative assays. Overall, Bio-Plex and CLIFT have higher specificity (>90.00%). ELISA and CLIA results are correlated with disease activity, and Bio-Plex results have the strongest correlation with SLEDAI score and active renal involvement. Bio-Plex assay has better overall performance in anti-dsDNA detection over Farr, ELISA, and CLIA methods in Chinese SLE patients.
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.