评价四种抗dsdna抗体检测方法的性能。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY
Lupus Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-23 DOI:10.1177/09612033251371116
Xuedan Gao, Liqiong Wu, Yi Li, Li Wang, Zhuochun Huang, Junlong Zhang, Zhenzhen Su, Bin Yang
{"title":"评价四种抗dsdna抗体检测方法的性能。","authors":"Xuedan Gao, Liqiong Wu, Yi Li, Li Wang, Zhuochun Huang, Junlong Zhang, Zhenzhen Su, Bin Yang","doi":"10.1177/09612033251371116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo evaluate the concordance of four anti-dsDNA antibody detection methods-Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), acridine ester direct chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), and digital liquid chip method (DLCM)-and to assess their diagnostic efficacy in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients.MethodsA total of 285 serum samples were collected, including 170 SLE patients, 39 with non-SLE autoimmune diseases (AIDs), 28 with non-AIDs, and 48 undiagnosed cases. The concordance and diagnostic performance of anti-dsDNA antibody methods were analyzed.ResultsThe diagnostic performance showed that DLCM exhibited the highest sensitivity (86.87%), while CLIA demonstrated the highest specificity (94.03%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was ranked as CLIFT < ELISA < CLIA < DLCM (AUC = 0.938). Anti-dsDNA antibodies detected by both CLIFT and DLCM correlated well with the SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI), while CLIFT and CLIA were significantly correlated with lupus nephritis. Utilizing ROC curve-derived cut-off values, the overall concordance of CLIFT and other methods ranged from 80.14% to 82.58% (kappa > 0.6, <i>P</i> < 0.001), and the concordance between quantitative methods ranged from 89.55% to 91.29% (kappa > 0.8, <i>P</i> < 0.001).ConclusionCLIFT, ELISA, CLIA, and DLCM all showed impressive diagnostic efficacy in detecting anti-dsDNA antibodies. CLIFT shows a strong correlation with SLE activity and lupus nephritis. DLCM, a relatively new method, also showed excellent performance and could be integrated into clinical laboratory workflows for anti-dsDNA antibody testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":18044,"journal":{"name":"Lupus","volume":" ","pages":"1251-1260"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the performance of four anti-dsDNA antibody detection methods.\",\"authors\":\"Xuedan Gao, Liqiong Wu, Yi Li, Li Wang, Zhuochun Huang, Junlong Zhang, Zhenzhen Su, Bin Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09612033251371116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectiveTo evaluate the concordance of four anti-dsDNA antibody detection methods-Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), acridine ester direct chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), and digital liquid chip method (DLCM)-and to assess their diagnostic efficacy in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients.MethodsA total of 285 serum samples were collected, including 170 SLE patients, 39 with non-SLE autoimmune diseases (AIDs), 28 with non-AIDs, and 48 undiagnosed cases. The concordance and diagnostic performance of anti-dsDNA antibody methods were analyzed.ResultsThe diagnostic performance showed that DLCM exhibited the highest sensitivity (86.87%), while CLIA demonstrated the highest specificity (94.03%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was ranked as CLIFT < ELISA < CLIA < DLCM (AUC = 0.938). Anti-dsDNA antibodies detected by both CLIFT and DLCM correlated well with the SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI), while CLIFT and CLIA were significantly correlated with lupus nephritis. Utilizing ROC curve-derived cut-off values, the overall concordance of CLIFT and other methods ranged from 80.14% to 82.58% (kappa > 0.6, <i>P</i> < 0.001), and the concordance between quantitative methods ranged from 89.55% to 91.29% (kappa > 0.8, <i>P</i> < 0.001).ConclusionCLIFT, ELISA, CLIA, and DLCM all showed impressive diagnostic efficacy in detecting anti-dsDNA antibodies. CLIFT shows a strong correlation with SLE activity and lupus nephritis. DLCM, a relatively new method, also showed excellent performance and could be integrated into clinical laboratory workflows for anti-dsDNA antibody testing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lupus\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1251-1260\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lupus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09612033251371116\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lupus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09612033251371116","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评价四种抗dsdna抗体检测方法——透明荷叶间接免疫荧光法(CLIFT)、酶联免疫吸附法(ELISA)、吖啶酯直接化学发光免疫法(CLIA)和数字液体芯片法(DLCM)的一致性,并评价其对系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)患者的诊断效果。方法共采集血清样本285份,其中SLE患者170份,非SLE自身免疫性疾病(AIDs)患者39份,非AIDs患者28份,未确诊患者48份。分析了抗dsdna抗体方法的一致性和诊断性能。结果DLCM的诊断敏感性最高(86.87%),CLIA的诊断特异性最高(94.03%)。受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)依次为CLIFT < ELISA < CLIA < DLCM (AUC = 0.938)。CLIFT和DLCM检测到的抗dsdna抗体与SLE疾病活动指数(SLEDAI)相关良好,而CLIFT和CLIA与狼疮肾炎相关显著。利用ROC曲线衍生的截止值,CLIFT与其他方法的总体一致性为80.14% ~ 82.58% (kappa > 0.6, P < 0.001),定量方法之间的一致性为89.55% ~ 91.29% (kappa > 0.8, P < 0.001)。结论clift、ELISA、CLIA和DLCM检测抗dsdna抗体均有较好的诊断效果。CLIFT与SLE活动度和狼疮性肾炎密切相关。DLCM作为一种相对较新的方法,也表现出优异的性能,可以整合到临床实验室工作流程中进行抗dsdna抗体检测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the performance of four anti-dsDNA antibody detection methods.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the concordance of four anti-dsDNA antibody detection methods-Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), acridine ester direct chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), and digital liquid chip method (DLCM)-and to assess their diagnostic efficacy in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients.MethodsA total of 285 serum samples were collected, including 170 SLE patients, 39 with non-SLE autoimmune diseases (AIDs), 28 with non-AIDs, and 48 undiagnosed cases. The concordance and diagnostic performance of anti-dsDNA antibody methods were analyzed.ResultsThe diagnostic performance showed that DLCM exhibited the highest sensitivity (86.87%), while CLIA demonstrated the highest specificity (94.03%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) was ranked as CLIFT < ELISA < CLIA < DLCM (AUC = 0.938). Anti-dsDNA antibodies detected by both CLIFT and DLCM correlated well with the SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI), while CLIFT and CLIA were significantly correlated with lupus nephritis. Utilizing ROC curve-derived cut-off values, the overall concordance of CLIFT and other methods ranged from 80.14% to 82.58% (kappa > 0.6, P < 0.001), and the concordance between quantitative methods ranged from 89.55% to 91.29% (kappa > 0.8, P < 0.001).ConclusionCLIFT, ELISA, CLIA, and DLCM all showed impressive diagnostic efficacy in detecting anti-dsDNA antibodies. CLIFT shows a strong correlation with SLE activity and lupus nephritis. DLCM, a relatively new method, also showed excellent performance and could be integrated into clinical laboratory workflows for anti-dsDNA antibody testing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lupus
Lupus 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
225
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The only fully peer reviewed international journal devoted exclusively to lupus (and related disease) research. Lupus includes the most promising new clinical and laboratory-based studies from leading specialists in all lupus-related disciplines. Invaluable reading, with extended coverage, lupus-related disciplines include: Rheumatology, Dermatology, Immunology, Obstetrics, Psychiatry and Cardiovascular Research…
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信