Abstract
Introduction. The objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT). Methods. In the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study. Results. The overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT. Conclusion. Significant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 902821 |
| Journal | Journal of Immunology Research |
| Volume | 2015 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 5 2015 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Immunology
- Immunology and Allergy
Cite this
Clinical comparison of QUANTA flash dsDNA chemiluminescent immunoassay with four current assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies. / Infantino, Maria; Meacci, Francesca; Bentow, Chelsea; Martis, Peter; Benucci, Maurizio; Afeltra, Antonella; Rigon, Amelia; Atzeni, Fabiola; Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo; Manfredi, Mariangela; Mahler, Michael.
In: Journal of Immunology Research, Vol. 2015, 902821, 05.01.2015.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical comparison of QUANTA flash dsDNA chemiluminescent immunoassay with four current assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies
AU - Infantino, Maria
AU - Meacci, Francesca
AU - Bentow, Chelsea
AU - Martis, Peter
AU - Benucci, Maurizio
AU - Afeltra, Antonella
AU - Rigon, Amelia
AU - Atzeni, Fabiola
AU - Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo
AU - Manfredi, Mariangela
AU - Mahler, Michael
PY - 2015/1/5
Y1 - 2015/1/5
N2 - Introduction. The objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT). Methods. In the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study. Results. The overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT. Conclusion. Significant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT.
AB - Introduction. The objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT). Methods. In the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study. Results. The overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT. Conclusion. Significant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921329744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921329744&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1155/2015/902821
DO - 10.1155/2015/902821
M3 - Article
C2 - 25759849
AN - SCOPUS:84921329744
VL - 2015
JO - Journal of Immunology Research
JF - Journal of Immunology Research
SN - 2314-8861
M1 - 902821
ER -