Cited by 64Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Performance characteristics of rheumatoid factor and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody assays may impact ACR/EULAR classification of rheumatoid arthritis

Open access
Van Hoovels, Lieve, Jacobs, Julie, Vander Cruyssen, Bert, Van den Bremt, Stefanie, Verschueren, Patrick, Bossuyt, Xavier·2018·Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases

Abstract

Objectives Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) are integrated in the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to evaluate the technical and diagnostic performance of different RF and ACPA assays and to evaluate whether differences in performance impact RA classification.Methods Samples from 594 consecutive patients who for the first time consulted a rheumatologist (44 of whom were diagnosed with RA) and 26 extra newly diagnosed patients with RA were analysed with six different RF assays (Menarini, Thermo Fisher, Inova, Roche, Abbott, Euroimmun) and seven different ACPA assays (Menarini, Thermo Fisher, Inova, Roche, Abbott, Euro Diagnostica, Euroimmun).Results We found differences in analytical performance between assays. There was poor numerical agreement between the different RF and ACPA assays. For all assays, the likelihood ratio for RA increased with increasing antibody levels. The areas under the curve of receiver operating characteristic analysis of the RF (range 0.676-0.709) and ACPA assays (range 0.672-0.769) only differed between some ACPA assays. Nevertheless, using the cut-off proposed by the manufacturer, there was a large variation in sensitivity and specificity between assays (mainly for RF). Consequently, depending on the assay used, a subgroup of patients (13% for RF, 1% for ACPA and 9% for RF/ACPA) might or might not be classified as RA according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria.Conclusion Due to poor harmonisation of RF and ACPA assays and of test result interpretation, RA classification according to 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria may vary when different assays are used.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212365

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Anti-dsDNA tests of differing design may lead to the differential classification of patients, as is the case for other autoantibodies such as rheumatoid factor and anti-CCP antibodies.

    “Anti-dsDNA tests of differing design may lead to the differential classification of patients, as is the case for other autoantibodies (e.g., rheumatoid factor and anti-CCP antibodies) (72)(73)(74).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Centers for disease control, 2008, Human ACPA serum, Centers for disease control reference reagent for human reference serum for citrullinated peptide/protein antibodies

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Van Hoovels, L., Jacobs, J., Vander Cruyssen, B., Van den Bremt, S., Verschueren, P., & Bossuyt, X.
Affiliations
  • Onze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital (BE)
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven (BE)
Venue
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
77
Issue
5
Pages
667-677
ISSN
0003-4967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2784454730
Cited by
64
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4
FWCI
4.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Medical Laboratory Technology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, rheumatoid factor, anti-CCP antibodies, anti-citrullinated protein antibodies, 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria, assay agreement, diagnostic performance, sensitivity and specificity, likelihood ratios, newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, assay harmonization
MeSH terms
Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Female, Humans, Immunoassay, Male, Middle Aged, Rheumatoid Factor, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Likelihood Functions, Area Under Curve

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