Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar;41(1):73-79.
doi: 10.12932/AP-301019-0681.

Determination of specific autoantibodies in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus by Line immunoassay, ELISA and CLIF assay

Affiliations
Free article

Determination of specific autoantibodies in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus by Line immunoassay, ELISA and CLIF assay

Kanphai Wongjarit et al. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol. 2023 Mar.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Detection of specific antinuclear-antibodies is very importance in term of diagnosis, prognosis and management of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). To date, Line immunoassay (LIA), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence (CLIF) assay are commonly used for detection of specific antinuclear-antibodies.

Objective: To determine the performance of LIA, ELISA and CLIF for the detection of anti-double-stranded DNA (dsDNA), anti-nucleosome, and anti-extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) antibodies in patients with SLE.

Methods: A total 100 sera from 50 patients with SLE, 25 patients with disease control and 25 healthy control subjects were tested for anti-dsDNA, anti-nucleosome, and anti-ENA antibodies by LIA, ELISA, and CLIF assay. Agreement and diagnostic performance of each assay were analyzed using Cohen's kappa coefficient and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

Results: For the detection of anti-dsDNA antibody, ELISA had a substantial agreement with CLIF assay (? = 0.74) but LIA had a fair agreement with ELISA and CLIF assay (? = 0.37, and 0.35 respectively). For the detection of anti-nucleosome, anti-nRNP/Sm, anti-Sm, anti-SSA, and anti-SSB antibodies, LIA had a substantial to perfect agreement with ELISA (? = 0.64, 0.78, 0.68, 0.91, and 0.74, respectively). Anti-dsDNA-NcX ELISA and anti-dsDNA CLIF assay had equally diagnostic performance (sensitivity, 66% vs. 68%, and specificity, 96% vs. 94%, respectively) whereas, anti-dsDNA LIA has low sensitivity (22%) but high specificity (100%).

Conclusions: LIA, ELISA, and CLIF demonstrated comparable performance for the detection of specific antinuclear-antibodies. However, there were some discrepancy between assays particularly in the detection of anti-dsDNA antibody.

PubMed Disclaimer