ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Chemiluminescence Immunoassay and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay in the Diagnosis of Pemphigoid and Pemphigus: A Comparative Study.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBDs), including pemphigus vulgaris (PV), pemphigus foliaceus (PF), and bullous pemphigoid (BP), are mediated by autoantibodies against desmogleins (DSG1, DSG3) or hemidesmosomal proteins (BP180, BP230). While enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is commonly applied for antibody detection, chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) offers advantages such as a broader dynamic range and higher automation. To compare the diagnostic performance of CLIA and ELISA for detecting autoantibodies in patients with AIBDs, we collected 255 serum samples (92 controls, 84 BP, 69 PV, 10 PF) and 85 blister fluid samples (42 controls, 43 BP). Serum was tested for anti-BP180, anti-BP230, anti-DSG1, and anti-DSG3 antibodies using both assays; blister fluid was tested for anti-BP180 and anti-BP230. Using established cut-offs, the assays demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy for anti-BP180, anti-DSG1, and anti-DSG3 in serum, and excellent concordance (>90%). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed acceptable to excellent diagnostic value for both sample types, with CLIA generally achieving a higher area under the curve. Spearman's correlation and linear regression analyses confirmed moderate to strong agreement between the two methods. In conclusion, CLIA showed strong concordance with and comparable diagnostic accuracy to ELISA for AIBD serodiagnosis. Furthermore, this is the first study to evaluate CLIA for autoantibody detection in blister fluid from BP patients, demonstrating that blister fluid may serve as a less invasive sample type for diagnosis. Our cut-off analysis in a treated cohort also suggested that manufacturer-recommended thresholds may yield false-negative results, highlighting the need for population-specific reference intervals.
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.