Major immunoreactive domains of human ribosomal P proteins lie N-terminal to a homologous C-22 sequence: application to a novel ELISA for systemic lupus erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify immunoreactive domains on human ribosomal P0, P1 and P2 proteins, other than the C-22 peptide, to develop a novel ELISA using a combination of these proteins and to compare this ELISA with one using the C-22 peptide. Human recombinant P0, P1, P2 and mutant P0 lacking the homologous C-22 peptide (N-P0) were produced in bacteria and tested by ELISA and immunoblotting using sera from 48 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), 48 with an unrelated inflammatory disorder (Crohn's disease) and 47 healthy controls. ELISA with P0, P1 and P2, premixed at equimolar concentrations, gave higher OD readings than each protein tested individually. Eighteen SLE sera tested positive by ELISA with premixed P0, P1, P2 but only 3 tested positive with the C-22 peptide. Twenty-two SLE sera reacted positively, as determined by immunoblotting, with 5 different P protein combinations: P1P2, P0P1P2, P1, P0P1, P0 and P1. Only sera reactive with all three P proteins reacted with the C-22 peptide, with absent or minimal reactivity with N-P0. Native antigens yielded sensitivity (6/48, 13%) similar to the C-22 peptide assay. An ELISA with premixed P1 and P2 gave higher OD values than the arithmetic means with P1 or P2. Fifteen SLE patients had antibodies to double stranded (ds)-DNA, of which 6 also had antibodies to P0P1P2 by ELISA but 12 reactive with P0P1P2 did not have discernable ds-DNA antibodies. Ribosomal P autoantibodies react mainly with epitopes N-terminal to a homologous C-22 peptide. An ELISA with premixed P0, P1 and P2 has 5-fold greater sensitivity (38%) for SLE than an assay with the conventional C-22 peptide (7%). The combined sensitivity for SLE for antibodies to P0P1P2 and ds-DNA is 56%, higher than C-22 and ds-DNA, 38%. Only one of the SLE patients had neuropsychiatric lupus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".