Anti-dsDNA antibody assay: High specificity and sensitivity with a filtration radioassay in comparison to low specificity with the standard ELISA

Liping Yu, Jian Wang, James Robert O'Dell, James Oates, William P. Arend, George S. Eisenbarth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate whether a new fluid-phase filtration radioassay possesses both high sensitivity and specificity compared with the currently used ELISA and Farr assays. Methods. Sequential sera (25 samples) from 9 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), sera from 20 patients with SLE possessing anti-dsDNA antibodies by the Crithidia assay, 75 patients with rheumatoid arthritis possessing rheumatoid factors, 50 healthy control subjects, 767 from patients with type 1 diabetes, and a commercial standard serum sample were tested for anti-dsDNA antibodies with the 3 different assays. Results. Of serial dilutions of a standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample, only the highest positive sample (50 IU/ml) in the ELISA and the highest 2 positive samples (50 and 25 IU/ml) in the Farr assay were above the normal range. In contrast, all dilutions (to 2.5 IU/ml) of the standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample were above the normal range in the filtration radioassay. Using the values of 50 healthy control subjects in each assay to define the normal range, all 25 sequential sera from 9 patients with SLE were positive. In addition, 20/20 of the SLE individual sera, 2/75 (2.7%) of the RA sera, and 12/767 (1.6%) of the diabetes sera were positive (signal above normal range) in the filtration radioassay. The SLE sera were further examined in 2 additional assays, ELISA and Farr assay, and both assays were less sensitive and specific compared with the filtration radioassay. Conclusion. The fluid-phase filtration radioassay demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies in SLE, with the standard ELISA exhibiting lower specificity. We suggest that testing for anti-dsDNA antibodies can be improved using a fluid-phase filtration radioassay in comparison to commercial assays.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)734-739
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Rheumatology
Volume34
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 1 2007

Fingerprint

Anti-Idiotypic Antibodies
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Sensitivity and Specificity
Radioimmunoprecipitation Assay
Serum
Reference Values
Healthy Volunteers
Crithidia
Rheumatoid Factor
Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus
Rheumatoid Arthritis

Keywords

  • Anti-dsDNA
  • Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay
  • Farr assay
  • Radioassay
  • Systemic lupus erythematosus

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rheumatology
  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Immunology

Cite this

Anti-dsDNA antibody assay : High specificity and sensitivity with a filtration radioassay in comparison to low specificity with the standard ELISA. / Yu, Liping; Wang, Jian; O'Dell, James Robert; Oates, James; Arend, William P.; Eisenbarth, George S.

In: Journal of Rheumatology, Vol. 34, No. 4, 01.04.2007, p. 734-739.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yu, Liping ; Wang, Jian ; O'Dell, James Robert ; Oates, James ; Arend, William P. ; Eisenbarth, George S. / Anti-dsDNA antibody assay : High specificity and sensitivity with a filtration radioassay in comparison to low specificity with the standard ELISA. In: Journal of Rheumatology. 2007 ; Vol. 34, No. 4. pp. 734-739.
@article{b6a706ff01bc48179c8ed99b7d89bae7,
title = "Anti-dsDNA antibody assay: High specificity and sensitivity with a filtration radioassay in comparison to low specificity with the standard ELISA",
abstract = "Objective. To evaluate whether a new fluid-phase filtration radioassay possesses both high sensitivity and specificity compared with the currently used ELISA and Farr assays. Methods. Sequential sera (25 samples) from 9 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), sera from 20 patients with SLE possessing anti-dsDNA antibodies by the Crithidia assay, 75 patients with rheumatoid arthritis possessing rheumatoid factors, 50 healthy control subjects, 767 from patients with type 1 diabetes, and a commercial standard serum sample were tested for anti-dsDNA antibodies with the 3 different assays. Results. Of serial dilutions of a standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample, only the highest positive sample (50 IU/ml) in the ELISA and the highest 2 positive samples (50 and 25 IU/ml) in the Farr assay were above the normal range. In contrast, all dilutions (to 2.5 IU/ml) of the standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample were above the normal range in the filtration radioassay. Using the values of 50 healthy control subjects in each assay to define the normal range, all 25 sequential sera from 9 patients with SLE were positive. In addition, 20/20 of the SLE individual sera, 2/75 (2.7{\%}) of the RA sera, and 12/767 (1.6{\%}) of the diabetes sera were positive (signal above normal range) in the filtration radioassay. The SLE sera were further examined in 2 additional assays, ELISA and Farr assay, and both assays were less sensitive and specific compared with the filtration radioassay. Conclusion. The fluid-phase filtration radioassay demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies in SLE, with the standard ELISA exhibiting lower specificity. We suggest that testing for anti-dsDNA antibodies can be improved using a fluid-phase filtration radioassay in comparison to commercial assays.",
keywords = "Anti-dsDNA, Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, Farr assay, Radioassay, Systemic lupus erythematosus",
author = "Liping Yu and Jian Wang and O'Dell, {James Robert} and James Oates and Arend, {William P.} and Eisenbarth, {George S.}",
year = "2007",
month = "4",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "734--739",
journal = "Journal of Rheumatology",
issn = "0315-162X",
publisher = "Journal of Rheumatology",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Anti-dsDNA antibody assay

T2 - High specificity and sensitivity with a filtration radioassay in comparison to low specificity with the standard ELISA

AU - Yu, Liping

AU - Wang, Jian

AU - O'Dell, James Robert

AU - Oates, James

AU - Arend, William P.

AU - Eisenbarth, George S.

PY - 2007/4/1

Y1 - 2007/4/1

N2 - Objective. To evaluate whether a new fluid-phase filtration radioassay possesses both high sensitivity and specificity compared with the currently used ELISA and Farr assays. Methods. Sequential sera (25 samples) from 9 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), sera from 20 patients with SLE possessing anti-dsDNA antibodies by the Crithidia assay, 75 patients with rheumatoid arthritis possessing rheumatoid factors, 50 healthy control subjects, 767 from patients with type 1 diabetes, and a commercial standard serum sample were tested for anti-dsDNA antibodies with the 3 different assays. Results. Of serial dilutions of a standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample, only the highest positive sample (50 IU/ml) in the ELISA and the highest 2 positive samples (50 and 25 IU/ml) in the Farr assay were above the normal range. In contrast, all dilutions (to 2.5 IU/ml) of the standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample were above the normal range in the filtration radioassay. Using the values of 50 healthy control subjects in each assay to define the normal range, all 25 sequential sera from 9 patients with SLE were positive. In addition, 20/20 of the SLE individual sera, 2/75 (2.7%) of the RA sera, and 12/767 (1.6%) of the diabetes sera were positive (signal above normal range) in the filtration radioassay. The SLE sera were further examined in 2 additional assays, ELISA and Farr assay, and both assays were less sensitive and specific compared with the filtration radioassay. Conclusion. The fluid-phase filtration radioassay demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies in SLE, with the standard ELISA exhibiting lower specificity. We suggest that testing for anti-dsDNA antibodies can be improved using a fluid-phase filtration radioassay in comparison to commercial assays.

AB - Objective. To evaluate whether a new fluid-phase filtration radioassay possesses both high sensitivity and specificity compared with the currently used ELISA and Farr assays. Methods. Sequential sera (25 samples) from 9 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), sera from 20 patients with SLE possessing anti-dsDNA antibodies by the Crithidia assay, 75 patients with rheumatoid arthritis possessing rheumatoid factors, 50 healthy control subjects, 767 from patients with type 1 diabetes, and a commercial standard serum sample were tested for anti-dsDNA antibodies with the 3 different assays. Results. Of serial dilutions of a standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample, only the highest positive sample (50 IU/ml) in the ELISA and the highest 2 positive samples (50 and 25 IU/ml) in the Farr assay were above the normal range. In contrast, all dilutions (to 2.5 IU/ml) of the standard anti-dsDNA antibody sample were above the normal range in the filtration radioassay. Using the values of 50 healthy control subjects in each assay to define the normal range, all 25 sequential sera from 9 patients with SLE were positive. In addition, 20/20 of the SLE individual sera, 2/75 (2.7%) of the RA sera, and 12/767 (1.6%) of the diabetes sera were positive (signal above normal range) in the filtration radioassay. The SLE sera were further examined in 2 additional assays, ELISA and Farr assay, and both assays were less sensitive and specific compared with the filtration radioassay. Conclusion. The fluid-phase filtration radioassay demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of anti-dsDNA antibodies in SLE, with the standard ELISA exhibiting lower specificity. We suggest that testing for anti-dsDNA antibodies can be improved using a fluid-phase filtration radioassay in comparison to commercial assays.

KW - Anti-dsDNA

KW - Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay

KW - Farr assay

KW - Radioassay

KW - Systemic lupus erythematosus

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247355024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247355024&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 17407230

AN - SCOPUS:34247355024

VL - 34

SP - 734

EP - 739

JO - Journal of Rheumatology

JF - Journal of Rheumatology

SN - 0315-162X

IS - 4

ER -