ArticleYonsei medical journal2020
Detection of Anti-Extractable Nuclear Antigens in Patients with Systemic Rheumatic Disease via Fluorescence Enzyme Immunoassay and Its Clinical Utility.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Value of Laboratory Assays Toward Autoimmune Diseases.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025Article
- Anti-Sm antibodies in the classification criteria of systemic lupus erythematosus.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTesting for autoantibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENAs) plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of systemic rheumatic disease. Currently, no gold standard tests are available for detecting anti-ENAs. To address this gap, we aimed to identify an assay that exhibits satisfactory diagnostic performance in the detection of five common anti-ENAs by comparing two commonly used assays, an automated fluorescent enzyme immunoassay (FEIA) and a microplate ELISA assay. MATERIALS AND
methodsSera from 100 patients with systemic rheumatic disease were collected and assayed with FEIA and microplate ELISA to detect anti-ENAs. Statistical analyses were performed to check the agreement rate between the two platforms using kappa coefficients. Analytical sensitivity and specificity for each assay were calculated.
resultsThe concordance rates between ELISA and FEIA ranged from 89% for anti-RNP to 97% for anti-Scl-70, and the kappa coefficients of the two assays were in the range of 0.44 to 0.82. Between the two assays, a significant difference in sensitivity and specificity was seen only for anti-Sm and anti-RNP, respectively.
conclusionIn this study, FEIA and ELISA showed comparable efficiency for detecting anti-ENAs.
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.