Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35110513›Full record

ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2022

A Comparison of Line Blots, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent, and RNA-immunoprecipitation Assays of Antisynthetase Antibodies in Serum Samples from 44 Patients.

Koichiro Shinoda, Maiko Okumura, Satoshi Yamaguchi, Atsushi Matsui, Reina Tsuda, Hiroyuki Hounoki, Shigeaki Suzuki, Kazuyuki Tobe

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Koichiro ShinodaFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Maiko OkumuraFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Satoshi YamaguchiFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Atsushi MatsuiFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Reina TsudaFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Hiroyuki HounokiFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
Shigeaki SuzukiDepartment of Neurology, Keio University School of Medicine, Japan.
Kazuyuki TobeFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Japan.
University of Toyama · JPKeio University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective To determine the differences between anti-aminoacyl tRNA synthetase (ARS) antibodies among line blots, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) anti-ARS tests, and RNA-immunoprecipitation (IP) assays. Methods Sera from patients with confirmed or suspected antisynthetase syndrome (ASS) that were positive for either the anti-ARS test or the line-blot assay were used to perform an RNA-IP assay and ELISA to detect individual anti-ARS antibodies. Results Among the 44 patients, 10 were positive only in line-blot assays, 6 were positive only in the anti-ARS test, and 28 were positive in both assays. We compared the accuracy of these assays against the gold standard RNA-IP assay. The κ coefficient was 0.23 in the line-blot assay, but this increased to 0.75 when the cut-off was increased from 1+ to 2+. The κ coefficient was 0.73 in the anti-ARS test. The κ coefficient was 0.85 for positivity in both assays. Patients with ASS that was positive in an RNA-IP assay more frequently had mechanic's hand (62.1% vs. 20%: p=0.031), myositis (51.7 vs. 10%: p=0.028) and more ASS symptoms than those who were positive only in line-blot assays (3.48 vs. 2.2: p=0.019). Conclusions Clinicians need to understand the features of each assay and determine diagnoses by also considering clinical presentations. Diagnoses should not be judged based only on the results of line-blot assays due to the risk of a misdiagnosis from false positives.

Indexed as

ImmunosorbentsMyositisAutoantibodiesHumansImmunoprecipitationRNAAutoantibodiesImmunosorbentsRNAanti-synthetase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (anti-ARS test)antisynthetase syndromeline-blot assayRNA-immunoprecipitation assay

Identifiers

PMID35110513
PMCPMC8866784
OpenAlexW4210548843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.