MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983119175 · doi:10.1155/2014/143274

Antiphospholipase A<sub>2</sub>Receptor Autoantibodies: A Comparison of Three Different Immunoassays for the Diagnosis of Idiopathic Membranous Nephropathy

2014· article· en· W1983119175 on OpenAlexaff
Astrid Behnert, Mario Schiffer, Janina Müller‐Deile, Laurence H. Beck, Michael Mähler, Marvin J. Fritzler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Immunology Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoantibodySerologyAntibodyImmunoassayMedicineImmunofluorescenceMembranous nephropathyRecombinant DNAImmunologyNephrotic syndromeInternal medicineBiologyGlomerulonephritisKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The recent identification of circulating autoantibodies directed towards the M-type phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2R) has been a major advancement in the serological diagnosis of idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN), a common cause of nephrotic syndrome in adults. The goal of this study was to compare the performance characteristics of two commercial assays as well as the first addressable laser bead immunoassay (ALBIA) developed for the detection of anti-PLA2R antibodies. METHODS: Serum samples of 157 IMN patients and 142 controls were studied. Samples were tested by a cell based immunofluorescence assay (CBA-IFA, Euroimmun, Germany), by ELISA (Euroimmun), and by a novel ALBIA employing an in vivo expressed recombinant human PLA2R. RESULTS: Overall, the three assays showed significant qualitative and quantitative correlation. As revealed by receiver operating characteristic analysis, the ALBIA correlated better with the CBA-IFA than the ELISA (P = 0.0003). The clinical sensitivities/specificities for IMN were 60.0% (51.0-68.5%)/98.6% (95.0-99.8%) and 56.2% (47.2-64.8%)/100.0% (97.4-100.0%) for ALBIA and CBA-IFA, respectively. CONCLUSION: The ALBIA represents a promising assay for the detection of anti-PLA2R antibodies showing similar performance to the CBA-IFA and the advantage of ease of use and suitability for high throughput, rapid turnaround times, and multiplexing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations79
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Immunology ResearchSame topicRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesFrench-language works237,207