Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Letter response
Response to: ‘Detection of antinuclear antibodies: added-value of solid phase assay?’ by Bossuyt and Fieuws
  1. Nancy Agmon-Levin1,
  2. Jan Damoiseaux2,
  3. Yehuda Shoenfeld1,3
  1. 1The Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel; Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
  2. 2Central Diagnostic Laboratory, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  3. 3Incumbent of the Laura Schwarz-Kip Chair for Research of Autoimmune Diseases, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel

Statistics from

We have read the letter by Bossuyt and Fieuws entitled ‘Detection of anti-nuclear antibodies, added-value of solid phase assay?’ with great interest.1 In this letter, the authors described a comparison between anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) performed by indirect immunofluorescent assay (IIFA) and by an automated method (fluoroenzymeimmunoassay; EliA CTD screen, Thermo Fisher) using samples obtained from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis, Sjögren's syndrome (SS) and healthy controls. The authors concluded that the favourable method for ANA detection is disease dependent and that combining IIFA with solid phase assay can increase the diagnostic accuracy.

These points, raised by Bossuyt and Fieuws, may be regarded in the perspective of the international recommendations for ANA detection that we have recently published.2 Indeed, our recommendations support the use of IIFA as …

View Full Text


  • Handling editor Tore K Kvien

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

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.

Linked Articles