CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 702

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Range of antinuclear antibodies in “healthy” individuals

Tan, E. M., Feltkamp, T. E. W., Smolen, J. S., Butcher, B., Dawkins, R., Fritzler, M. J., Gordon, T., Hardin, J. A., Kalden, J. R., Lahita, R. G., Maini, R. N., McDougal, J. S., Rothfield, N. F., Smeenk, R. J., Takasaki, Y., Wiik, A., Wilson, M. R., Koziol, J. A.·1997·Arthritis & Rheumatism
DOI 10.1002/art.1780400909
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective . To determine the range of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) in “healthy” individuals compared with that in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc; scleroderma), Sjögren's syndrome (SS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or soft tissue rheumatism (STR). Methods . Fifteen international laboratories experienced in performing tests for ANA by indirect immunofluorescence participated in analyzing coded sera from healthy individuals and from patients in the 5 different disease groups described above. Except for the stipulation that HEp‐2 cells should be used as substrate, each laboratory used its own in‐house methodology so that the data might be expected to reflect the output of a cross‐section of worldwide ANA reference laboratories. The sera were analyzed at 4 dilutions: 1:40, 1:80, 1:160, and 1:320. Results . In healthy individuals, the frequency of ANA did not differ significantly across the 4 age subgroups spanning 20–60 years of age. This putatively normal population was ANA positive in 31.7% of individuals at 1:40 serum dilution, 13.3% at 1:80, 5.0% at 1:160, and 3.3% at 1:320. In comparison with the findings among the disease groups, a low cutoff point at 1:40 serum dilution (high sensitivity, low specificity) could have diagnostic value, since it would classify virtually all patients with SLE, SSc, or SS as ANA positive. Conversely, a high positive cutoff at 1:160 serum dilution (high specificity, low sensitivity) would be useful to confirm the presence of disease in only a portion of cases, but would be likely to exclude 95% of normal individuals. Conclusion . It is recommended that laboratories performing immunofluorescent ANA tests should report results at both the 1:40 and 1:160 dilutions, and should supply information on the percentage of normal individuals who are positive at these dilutions. A low‐titer ANA is not necessarily insignificant and might depend on at least 4 specific factors. ANA assays can be a useful discriminant in recognizing certain disease conditions, but can create misunderstanding when the limitations are not fully appreciated.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.1780400909

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Van Venrooij WJ, 1994, Manual of Biological Markers of Disease, Section B: Autoantigens
  2. 10.1016/S0049-0172(95)80004-2 · DOI
  3. 10.1002/art.1780250814 · DOI
  4. 10.1002/art.1780311019 · DOI
  5. 10.1002/art.1780400304 · DOI
  6. 10.1002/art.1780251101 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1002/art.1780230510 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/art.1780360309 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/art.1780310302 · DOI
  10. McCarty DJ, 1993, Arthritis and Allied Conditions
  11. Mead R, 1988, The Design of Experiments
  12. Mosteller F, 1977, Data Analysis and Regression
  13. Griner PF, 1981, Selection and interpretation of diagnostic tests and procedures, Ann Intern Med, 94, 553
  14. Hanley JA, 1989, Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: the state of the art, Crit Rev Diagn Imaging, 29, 307
  15. 10.1002/cyto.990120609 · DOI
  16. 10.1055/s-0038-1649682 · DOI
  17. 10.1111/j.1423-0410.1994.tb05028.x · DOI
  18. 10.1016/0959-8049(94)00496-R · DOI
  19. Carr RI, 1975, Comparison of DNA binding in normal population, general hospital laboratory personnel and personnel from laboratories studying SLE, J Rheumatol, 2, 178
  20. Zarminski MA, 1992, Anti‐dsDNA antibodies in laboratory workers handling blood from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, J Rheumatol, 19, 1380
  21. Dawkins RL, 1985, Sensitivity and specificity of autoantibody testing, Autoimmune Dis, 24, 669, 10.1016/B978-0-12-596920-8.50031-7 · DOI
  22. Shoenfeld Y, 1989, The Mosaic of Autoimmunity, 10.1016/0167-5699(89)90245-4 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tan, E. M., Feltkamp, T. E. W., Smolen, J. S., Butcher, B., Dawkins, R., Fritzler, M. J., Gordon, T., Hardin, J. A., Kalden, J. R., Lahita, R. G., Maini, R. N., McDougal, J. S., Rothfield, N. F., Smeenk, R. J., Takasaki, Y., Wiik, A., Wilson, M. R., & Koziol, J. A.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-09
Volume
40
Issue
9
Pages
1601-1611
ISSN
  • 0004-3591
  • 1529-0131
DOI
10.1002/art.1780400909
Cited by
702
References
0
Language
en
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 3024 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review