ArticlePloS one2026
Comparative evaluation of immunoserological detection of F-actin antibodies.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
Autoantibody detection remains essential in diagnosing autoimmune liver diseases (AILD), particularly autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), in which smooth muscle antibodies (SMA) targeting filamentous actin (F-actin) are commonly observed. This study assessed the concordance between immunofluorescence testing (IFT), the gold standard for SMA detection, and a commercially available F-actin ELISA in a real-world clinical setting. During the three-months study period, 244 samples were sent to our laboratory for autoantibody testing; 241 were included in the study. SMA IFT on rodent stomach, kidney and liver sections identified 104 positive cases, with ELISA-detected F-actin antibody levels being significantly higher in these cases. F-actin ELISA concentrations significantly increased with higher SMA IFT titer. Concordance between the ELISA (using manufacturer-recommended cut-offs of 20 and 30 units) and IFT depended on the SMA staining pattern. Only slight agreement was found between positive kidney SMA staining patterns and ELISA concentration. Stomach SMA staining showed moderate agreement (Cohen's kappa = 0.49) and a subgroup analysis revealed better agreement in autoimmune disease cases, particularly AIH. An optimized ELISA cut-off of 27.6 units improved agreement slightly (Cohen's kappa = 0.55). The results suggest that, although there is a certain level of concordance between the ELISA and stomach SMA IFT, the F-actin ELISA does not reliably predict SMA IFT staining. These findings underscore the importance of method validation and context-specific interpretation when implementing ELISA-based autoantibody screening in routine diagnostics.
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.