Identification and validation of anti-protein arginine methyltransferase 5 (PRMT5) antibody as a novel biomarker for systemic sclerosis (SSc)
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Correspondence on: ‘Identification and validation of anti-protein arginine methyltransferase 5 (PRMT5) antibody as a novel biomarker for systemic sclerosis (SSc)’ by Liang et al
    • Haojie Xu, Rheumatologist Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Peking University People’s Hospital
    • Other Contributors:
      • Sitian Zang, Researcher

    We read the article by Dr. Minrui Liang et al. with great interest. This study, utilizing DEEP SEQ proteomics, identified and validated anti-PRMT5 antibodies as specific biomarkers for systemic sclerosis (SSc) and demonstrated their potential pathogenicity in immunised mice with recombinant protein PRMT5, thus contributing significantly to a more comprehensive understanding of the pathogenesis of SSc. However, we noted the absence of any discussion on the concordance between patients positive for anti-PRMT5 antibodies and those positive for classic SSc-related antibodies such as antitopoisomerase antibodies (ATAs), anticentromere antibodies (ACAs) and anti-RNA polymerase III antibodies (ARAs). Including such information would clarify the implications for clinical practice. Additionally, there is an inconsistency in the labeling of figures: Figure 2 is marked as "TOP1" and Figure 6 as "Topo Ⅰ," with the manuscript describing it as "Topo Ⅰ." This inconsistency may confuse readers within the same article. As the target antigen for anti-Scl-70 antibodies, the term "anti-Scl-70" might be more familiar than "Anti-Topo I" to physicians. Furthermore, although the article contains AUC curves, it does not provide the optimal cut-off value of the novel biomarker with sensitivity and specificity, which would have offered more direct and clear relevance for disease diagnosis.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.