Assays for Sm and RNP antibodies: pitfalls and technical considerations.

Diagnostic immunology Pub Date : 1985-01-01
D P Molden, H Suzuki, R M Nakamura
{"title":"Assays for Sm and RNP antibodies: pitfalls and technical considerations.","authors":"D P Molden,&nbsp;H Suzuki,&nbsp;R M Nakamura","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sm antibodies are a specific serum marker for the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and a high titer of RNP antibodies in the absence of other antinuclear antibodies (ANA) is highly suggestive of the diagnosis of mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD); therefore, specificity is a very important aspect of the assays for these antibodies. Currently in the clinical laboratory, double immunodiffusion (ID) is the most specific of the assays for anti-Sm and RNP. When 74 sera from patients with various systemic rheumatic diseases were assayed by counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIE) with ID as the reference method, three sera contained nonspecific (non-Sm) precipitin lines in the assay for anti-Sm and three sera contained nonspecific (non-RNP) precipitin lines in the assay for RNP. Precipitin lines formed by the common antinuclear antibodies are more clearly separated by ID than CIE and care must be taken to avoid false identification of precipitin lines with CIE. Indirect immunofluorescence is recommended for ANA screening, ID for definitive antibody identification, and CIE for antibody quantification.</p>","PeriodicalId":77707,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic immunology","volume":"3 1","pages":"24-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1985-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sm antibodies are a specific serum marker for the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and a high titer of RNP antibodies in the absence of other antinuclear antibodies (ANA) is highly suggestive of the diagnosis of mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD); therefore, specificity is a very important aspect of the assays for these antibodies. Currently in the clinical laboratory, double immunodiffusion (ID) is the most specific of the assays for anti-Sm and RNP. When 74 sera from patients with various systemic rheumatic diseases were assayed by counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIE) with ID as the reference method, three sera contained nonspecific (non-Sm) precipitin lines in the assay for anti-Sm and three sera contained nonspecific (non-RNP) precipitin lines in the assay for RNP. Precipitin lines formed by the common antinuclear antibodies are more clearly separated by ID than CIE and care must be taken to avoid false identification of precipitin lines with CIE. Indirect immunofluorescence is recommended for ANA screening, ID for definitive antibody identification, and CIE for antibody quantification.

Sm和RNP抗体的检测:陷阱和技术考虑。
Sm抗体是诊断系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)的特异性血清标志物,在缺乏其他抗核抗体(ANA)的情况下,高滴度的RNP抗体高度提示混合性结缔组织病(MCTD)的诊断;因此,特异性是检测这些抗体的一个非常重要的方面。目前,在临床实验室中,双重免疫扩散(ID)是抗sm和RNP最特异性的检测方法。以ID为参比法,对74例不同系统性风湿病患者血清进行反免疫电泳(CIE)检测,3例血清抗sm检测中含有非特异性(非sm)沉淀线,3例血清RNP检测中含有非特异性(非RNP)沉淀线。由常见抗核抗体形成的沉淀线用ID比用CIE更清楚地分离,必须注意避免用CIE错误地识别沉淀线。推荐间接免疫荧光用于ANA筛选,ID用于确定抗体鉴定,CIE用于抗体定量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信