Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Sensitivity of the Phadia EliA connective tissue disease screen for less common disease-specific autoantibodies
  1. Jennifer C Parker,
  2. Christopher C Bunn
  1. Department of Clinical Immunology, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Chris Bunn, Department of Clinical Immunology, Royal Free Hospital, Pond Street, London NW3 2QG, UK; c.bunn{at}


Aim To evaluate the sensitivity of a commercial autoantibody screening method (Phadia EliA connective tissue disease (CTD) screen) for the detection of less common antibody specificities associated with connective tissue disease.

Methods 399 sera positive for anti-PM/Scl (n=102), anti-RNA polymerase III (n=199), anti-fibrillarin (n=50), anti-Mi-2 (n=12), anti-proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) (n=13) and anti-ribosomal P (n=23) were analysed using the solid phase assay. Each well was coated with the respective antigens for these autoantibodies and also with the antigens Ro, La, Jo-1, Scl-70, CENP-B, U1-RNP, Sm and native DNA.

Results All the anti-ribosomal P, anti-PCNA and anti-Mi-2 sera and 94% of the anti-PM/Scl sera were positive. For anti-fibrillarin, 36 (68%) were positive and 12 (22%) were equivocal. For anti-RNA polymerase III, 131 (67%) were positive, 23 (11%) were equivocal and 45 (22%) were negative.

Conclusions The sensitivity of the Phadia EliA CTD screen is currently insufficient for the assay to be used as a screening test for anti-fibrillarin and anti-RNA polymerase III, but appears to be satisfactory for the other autoantibodies tested.

  • Autoantibodies
  • autoimmune laboratory investigations
  • connective tissue disease
  • immunoassay

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • The authors contributed equally to the design and execution of the study and the preparation of the manuscript.

  • Competing interests None to declare.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.