ArticleClinical rheumatology2026
Comparative evaluation of antinuclear antibody detection by indirect immunofluorescence and line immunoassay with clinical correlation in suspected autoimmune disease patients: a retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Laboratory pitfalls of antinuclear antibody testing.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
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
objectiveThe study aimed to evaluate Antinuclear antibody detection by indirect immunofluorescence and line immunoassay in patients with suspected autoimmune diseases and to correlate immunofluorescence patterns and autoantibody profiles with their clinical features to improve diagnostic interpretation.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 1,342 patients clinically suspected of autoimmune diseases over nine months at a tertiary care hospital in North India. All samples were tested using indirect immunofluorescence on HEp-2 cells. Line immunoassay was performed on samples showing nuclear immunofluorescence patterns. Associations between serological findings, demographic variables, clinical features, and final diagnoses were statistically analysed.
resultsOf the 1,342 patients clinically suspected of autoimmune diseases, antinuclear antibodies by indirect immunofluorescence assay were detected in 308 patients (22.95%). Among these positive samples, nuclear patterns were observed in 206 (66.88%) cases and cytoplasmic patterns in 102 (33.11%). The speckled nuclear pattern was the most frequent (151/206; 73.30%), followed by homogeneous (9.22%), nucleolar (8.74%), and centromere (4.85%) patterns. Line immunoassay performed on nuclear pattern-positive samples identified antigen-specific autoantibodies in 67 cases (32.52%), while no autoantibodies were identified in 139 cases (67.48%). The most commonly detected autoantibodies were anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-dsDNA. A statistically significant association was observed between indirect immunofluorescence assay patterns and autoantibody profiles (χ2 = 597.587, p < 0.001). Antinuclear antibody positivity showed significant correlation with joint-related symptoms (p < 0.001) and swollen glands (p = 0.004). Distinct immunofluorescence patterns and autoantibody profiles demonstrated disease-specific associations, including centromere pattern with systemic sclerosis and homogeneous and speckled patterns with systemic lupus erythematosus and Sjögren's disease.
conclusionA combined diagnostic approach using indirect immunofluorescence for screening and line immunoassay for antigen-specific profiling improves diagnostic accuracy. This strategy is particularly valuable in resource-limited settings, enabling targeted diagnosis and clinical decision-making. Key Points • A dual methodology combining indirect immunofluorescence with Line immunoassay enhances diagnostic specificity in the identification of autoimmune diseases. • Significant associations were identified among Antinuclear antibody patterns, autoantibody profiles, and specific autoimmune diseases. • The study reinforces the utility of integrating indirect immunofluorescence and Line immunoassay in routine autoimmune diagnostics, especially in resource-limited healthcare settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41591621What 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.