ArticleMedical journal, Armed Forces India
An observational study to determine the role of indirect immunofluorescence and ELISA for desmogleins in the diagnosis and monitoring of autoimmune bullous disorders.
Article in Medical journal, Armed Forces India. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Autoimmune bullous disorder (AIBD) is a diverse group of blistering dermatoses that affects the skin and mucous membrane, characterized by the formation of autoantibodies against the desmosomal glycoproteins and adhesion molecular components of the basement membrane zone. Various immunoassay techniques for serological diagnosis are Direct Immunofluorescence (DIF), Indirect Immunofluorescence (IIF), Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and immunoblotting. Quantitative ELISA titer can also be used to monitor the disease activity and response to treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of IIF in diagnosing various AIBDs and the role of ELISA for desmogleins in monitoring disease activity in the pemphigus group of disorders. Methods: A total of 45 patients with freshly diagnosed AIBD were included in the study. Skin biopsies were done to establish the diagnosis by histopathology and DIF. BIOCHIP-based IIF assay was performed on the sera of the patient. The sensitivity and specificity of the IIF assay were then calculated based on the established diagnosis by Histopathological examination (HPE) and DIF. Quantitative ELISA titer was performed to measure the antibody (anti desmoglein (Dsg) 1 and 3) titre in serum samples of patients with pemphigus at baseline, 1 and 3 months follow-up after initiation of appropriate treatment therapy and results were then compared with disease activity scoring system. Results: Sensitivity and specificity of IIF for Dsg 1 for the pemphigus group were derived to be 85.7% and 98.2% respectively, while that for Dsg 3 were 100% and 98.7%, respectively. Sensitivity (90-100%) of IIF for Bullous pemphigoid was higher than specificity (85-96%). The ELISA titers of anti Dsg1 and 3 were also observed to fall sequentially so was the disease activity score during the follow-up visits at 1 and 3 months. Conclusion: Biochip IIF assay can be used as a screening tool for the serological diagnosis of AIBD and quantitative ELISA for monitoring the disease activity and response to treatment.
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.