The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Anti–basal ganglia antibodies in acute and persistent Sydenham’s chorea
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of methods to detect anti-basal ganglia antibodies (ABGA) in Sydenham's chorea (SC). BACKGROUND: SC is a delayed manifestation of group Abeta hemolytic streptococcal infection typically associated with rheumatic fever (RHF). SC is characterized by chorea and motor and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Patients with SC produce antibodies that cross-react with streptococcal, caudate, and subthalamic nuclei antigens detected using an immunofluorescent (IF) method with inconsistent reports of positivity. METHODS: The authors developed ELISA and Western immunoblotting (WB) methods to detect ABGA and compared these assays to IF. They investigated samples from patients with acute SC (n = 20), persistent SC (n = 16), control samples from RHF (n = 16), and healthy pediatric volunteers (n = 11). RESULTS: ABGA ELISA had a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 93% in acute SC. Both WB and IF had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 93%. In the persistent SC group, ABGA sensitivity dropped to 69% using WB and to 63% using IF. Three common basal ganglia antigens were identified by WB in both acute and persistent SC (40 kDa [n = 15], 45 kDa [n = 15], and 60 kDa [n = 13]). There was no antibody reactivity to cerebellum, cerebral cortex, or myelin antigen preparations in any group. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that Syndenham's chorea is an autoantibody-mediated disorder. Western immunoblotting and immunofluorescence are the best methods for detecting anti-basal ganglia antibodies, and reactivity to basal ganglia antigens of 40, 45, and 60 kDa were commonly seen in both acute and persistent cases of SC.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
FACS-array profiling of striatal projection neuron subtypes in juvenile and adult mouse brains
Lobo, M. K., Karsten, S. L., Gray, M., Geschwind, D. H., & Yang, X. W. (2006) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1654 · Cited by 411
Brimberg, L., Benhar, I., Mascaro-Blanco, A., Alvarez, K., Lotan, D., Winter, C., Klein, J., Moses, A. E., Somnier, F. E., Leckman, J. F., et al. (2012) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2012.56 · Cited by 202
Kumar, A., Williams, M. T., & Chugani, H. T. (2015) · Journal of Child Neurology · doi:10.1177/0883073814543303 · Cited by 163
Autoantibodies to cerebellum in children with autism associate with behavior
Goines, P., Haapanen, L., Boyce, R., Duncanson, P., Braunschweig, D., Delwiche, L., Hansen, R., Hertz-Picciotto, I., Ashwood, P., & Van de Water, J. (2011) · Brain, Behavior, and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2010.11.017 · Cited by 134
Platt, M. P., Agalliu, D., & Cutforth, T. (2017) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2017.00442 · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Church, A. J., Cardoso, F., Dale, R. C., Lees, A. J., Thompson, E. J., & Giovannoni, G.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2002-07-23
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 227-231
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2148683100
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 24.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Anti–basal ganglia antibodies in acute and persistent Sydenham’s chorea. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.59.2.227
- The paper
- Church, A. J., Cardoso, F., Dale, R. C., Lees, A. J., Thompson, E. J., & Giovannoni, G. (2002). Anti–basal ganglia antibodies in acute and persistent Sydenham’s chorea. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.59.2.227
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.