ArticleClinical rheumatology2021
Comparison of the analytical and clinical performances of four anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody assays for diagnosing rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of Diagnostic Antibodies in Immune-Mediated Diseases: A Focus on Antigens and Technologies.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2026Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Four Different Anti-CCP Assays for the Diagnosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Diagnostic Performance Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reactivity of Rheumatoid Arthritis-Associated Citrulline-Dependent Antibodies to Epstein-Barr Virus Nuclear Antigen1-3.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
objectivesAnti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP) is one of the most important serologic markers for diagnosing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aimed to compare the analytical and clinical performances of the second- and third-generation anti-CCP assays.
methodsFour automated anti-CCP assays were evaluated: Chorus anti-CCP (Diesse Diagnostica), Elecsys anti-CCP (Roche Diagnostics), Atellica® IM anti-CCP IgG (Siemens Healthineers), and Quanta Flash® CCP3 (Inova Diagnostics Inc.). Analytical performance included the precision, linearity, correlation, and concordance rate. For evaluating the clinical performance, 240 patient samples (120 positive and 120 negative samples, determined by the Chorus anti-CCP assay) were used, including those with a diagnosis of RA (n = 132) and non-RA (n = 108). Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the sensitivity and specificity were evaluated.
resultsAll four assays that were evaluated showed good precision and linearity, and their correlation and concordance rates were in acceptable ranges. The area under the curve (AUC) values ranged from 0.888 to 0.914, showing a good diagnostic performance. The sensitivity and specificity of all assays were similar (88.0-97.2%).
conclusionsAll four anti-CCP assays showed good analytical and diagnostic performances for diagnosing RA. After adjusting the cutoff values, these assays are expected to show enhanced sensitivity and specificity. Key Points • Previous studies have described the diagnostic performance of a few immunologic markers in RA diagnosis, but nothing has been proven to be sufficiently good in clinical practice. • All four automated anti-CCP assays showed good analytical and diagnostic performances for diagnosing RA in clinical practice. • After adjusting the cutoff values, these assays are expected to show enhanced sensitivity and specificity. • The present study provides reassuring evidence that any of the studied commercially available anti-CCP tests for detecting rheumatoid arthritis provide similar diagnostic information to institutions that adopt these specific testing systems.
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.