Likelihood ratio used to interpretation of autoantibody screening test (FAN-HEp-2) in systemic lupus eritematosus;Taxa de probabilidade como guia de interpretação do FAN-HEp-2 na pesquisa de autoanticorpos no lúpus erítematoso sistêmico

Jornal Brasileiro de Patologia e Medicina Laboratorial

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 275-283

  Beck, Sandra Trevisan ^a   Silva, João Carlos Nunes ^b   Schimlt, Sandra ^c   Fleck, Juliana ^d   Dos Santos, Rosane Souza ^d  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SANTA MARIA   (Brazil)

^b Departamento de Clínica Médica do Curso de Medicina da UFSM

^c Farmácia da UFSM ^*

^d Imunologia do Laboratório Central do Hospital Universitário da UFSM

Author keywords

Autoantibodies; Likelihood ratio; SLE

Indexed keywords

EID: 73449113908     PISSN: 16762444     EISSN: 16784774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. COLGLAZIER, C. L.; SUTEJ, P. G. Laboratory testing in the rheumatic diseases: a practical review. South Med J, v. 98, p. 185-191, 2005.
2. EGNER, W. The use of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of SLE. J Clin Pathol, v. 53, p. 424-432, 2000.
3. GAMBINO, S. R. Odds, probability and likelihood ratios. Lab Report, v. 8, p. 69-71, 1986.
4. GUIDELINES FOR IMMUNOLOGIC LABORATORY TESTING IN THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES. An introduction: American College of Rheumatology ad hoc comité on immunologic testing guidelines. Artritis & Rheumatism, v. 47, p. 429-433, 2002.
5. GUIMARÃES, F. N. C. et al. Il Consenso Brasileiro de Fator Antinuclear em Células HEp-2 - Definições para a padronização da pesquisa de auto-antlcorpos contra constituintes do núcleo (FAN HEp-2), nucléolo, citoplasma e aparelho mitótlco e suas associações clínicas. Rev Bras Reumatol, v. 43 n. 3 p. 129-140, 2003.
6. HABASH-BSEISO, D. E. et al. Serologic testing in connective tissue diseases. Clinical Medicine Research, v. 3 n. 3, p. 190-193, 2005.
7. HAHN, B. H. Antibodies to DNA. N Engl J Med, v. 338, p. 1359-1368, 1998.
8. HALKIN, A. et al. Likelihood ratios: getting diagnostic testing into perspective. Q J Med, v. 91, p. 247-258, 1998.
9. HANLEY, J. A. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: the state of the art. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging, v. 29, p.307-335, 1989.
10. HAUGBRO, K. et al. Anti-dsDNA antibodies and disease classification in antinuclear antibody positive patients: the role of analytical diversity. Ann Rheum Dis, v. 63 p. 386-394, 2004.
11. HAYDEN, S. R.; BROWN, M. D. Likelihood ratio: a powerful tool for incorporating the results of a diagnostic test into clinical decision making. Ann Emerg Med, v. 33, p. 575-580, 1999.
12. HOCHBERG, M. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum, v. 40, p. 1725-1734, 1997.
13. ISENBERG, D. A. et al. The origin, sequence, structure, and consequences of developing anti-DNA antibodies: a human perspective. Arthritis Rheum, v. 37, p. 169-180, 1994.
14. JUBY, A. et al. Specificity, sensitivity and diagnostic predictive value of selected laboratory generated autoantibody profiles in patients with connective tissue diseases. J Rheumatol, v. 18, p. 354-358, 1991.
15. KAVANAUGH, A. et al. Guidelines for Clinical Use of the Antinuclear Antibody Test and Tests for Specific Autoantibodies to Nuclear Antigens. Arch Pathol Lab Med, v. 124, p. 71-81, 2000.
16. KAVANAUGH, A. F; SOLOMON, D. H. Guidelines for immunologic laboratory testing In the rheumatic diseases: anti-DNA antibody tests. Arthritis Rheum, v. 47 n. 5 p. 546-555, 2002. (Pubitemid 35291379)
17. MANOUSSAKIS, M. et al. Testing for antibodies to ENA and to dsDNA is not indicated In FANA-negative sera. Clin Rheumatol, v. 7 p. 465-469, 1988.
18. RUFFATTI, A. et al. Anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies in the healthy elderly: prevalence and characteristics. J Clin Immunol, v. 10, p. 300-303, 1990.
19. RUTTIMANN, E. U. Statistical approaches to development and validation of predictive instruments. Crit Care Clin, v. 10, p. 19-35, 1994.
20. SACKETT, D. L. et al. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM. 2. ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
21. SOLOMON, D. H. et al. Evidence-based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. Arthritis Rheum, v. 47, n. 4, p. 434-444, 2002. (Pubitemid 34856134)
22. SOX, H. C. The evaluation of a diagnostic test. Ann Rev Med, v. 47, p. 463-471, 1996.
23. TAN, E. M. et al. Range of antinuclear antibodies in "healthy" individuals. Arthritis Rheum, v. 40, p. 16-111, 1997.
24. TOZZOLI, R. et al. Italian Society of Laboratory Medicine Study Group on the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Diseases. Guidelines for the laboratory use of autoantibody tests in the diagnosis and monitoring of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Am J Clin Pathol, v. 117, p. 316-324, 2002.
25. VILLALTA, D. et al. Anti-dsDNA antibody avidity determination by a simple reliable ELISA method for SLE diagnosis and monitoring. Lupus, v. 12, p. 31-36, 2003.