Literature DB >> 7033379

Avidity of antibodies to dsDNA: comparison of IFT on Crithidia luciliae, Farr assay, and PEG assay.

R Smeenk, G van der Lelij, L Aarden.   

Abstract

The Farr assay is thought to detect only antibodies to DNA of relative high avidity. This is due to the high salt concentration of the employed ammonium sulfate precipitation, which dissociates DNA-anti-DNA complexes of low avidity. A recently introduced method to detect anti-DNA, the PEG assay, circumvents these dissociating reaction conditions by using polyethylene glycol instead of ammonium sulfate to precipitate the complexes; we therefore thought to measure antibodies to DNA of low avidity as well. We tested this assumption in several ways. It was found that the PEG assay detects a population of antibodies to DNA that are missed by the Farr assay. Complexes made with these antibodies were salt labile and could readily be dissociated by means of excess DNA, whereas Farr-positive antibodies formed stable complexes with DNA. Avidity studies using the method described by Celada et al. indicated that the anti-DNA detected by the PEG assay but missed by the Farr assay was of relatively low avidity. An inverse correlation between avidity and slope of the binding curves in the PEG assay was observed. These results confirm the notion that the PEG assay detects antibodies to DNA of low avidity. The fact that the Farr assay does not measure these antibodies confers possible diagnostic importance upon the PEG assay.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7033379

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immunol        ISSN: 0022-1767            Impact factor:   5.422


  24 in total

1.  Anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies in the healthy elderly: prevalence and characteristics.

Authors:  A Ruffatti; A Calligaro; T Del Ross; M T Bertoli; A Doria; L Rossi; S Todesco
Journal:  J Clin Immunol       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 8.317

2.  LDL-mediated interaction of DNA and DNA-anti-DNA immune complexes with cell surface.

Authors:  A E Kabakov; V A Saenko; A M Poverenny
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 3.  Anti-DNA, antihistone, and antinucleosome antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus and drug-induced lupus.

Authors:  G Q Shen; Y Shoenfeld; J B Peter
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 8.667

Review 4.  Anti-DNA antibodies as early predictor for disease exacerbations in SLE. Guideline for treatment?

Authors:  P E Spronk; H Bootsma; C G Kallenberg
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 8.667

Review 5.  Systemic diseases and the detection of antinuclear and anticytoplasmic antibodies. An historical review.

Authors:  M Walravens
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 2.980

6.  Antibodies to dsDNA in connective tissue diseases measured by ultramicro enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) adapted to the chamber analytical technique (CAT).

Authors:  U Wollina
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 3.017

7.  Serological profile of rheumatoid arthritis in west Africa.

Authors:  A O Adebajo; P J Charles; B L Hazleman; R N Maini
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.631

8.  Characterization of DNA in polyethylene glycol precipitated immune complexes from sera of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

Authors:  K Ikebe; R C Gupta; E M Tan
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Detection of antibodies to DNA: a technical assessment.

Authors:  R Smeenk; M Hylkema
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 2.316

Review 10.  Anti-dsDNA: choice of assay in relation to clinical value.

Authors:  R J Smeenk; H G van den Brink; K Brinkman; R M Termaat; J H Berden; A J Swaak
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.631

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.