International Multicenter Evaluation of Autoantibodies to Ribosomal P Proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autoantibodies to the ribosomal phosphoproteins (Rib-P) are a serological feature of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The reported prevalence of anti-Rib-P antibodies in SLE ranges from 10 to 40%, being higher in Asian patients. The variation in the observed frequency may be related to a number of factors but is dependent in large part on the test system used to detect the autoantibodies. An association of anti-Rib-P with central nervous system involvement and neuropsychiatric manifestations of SLE has been controversial. In the present international multicenter study, we evaluated the clinical accuracy of a new sensitive Rib-P-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay based on recombinant Rib-P polypeptides. The results showed that 21.3% of 947 SLE patients, but only 0.7% of 1,113 control patients, had a positive test result (P < 0.0001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic efficiency were determined to be 21.3%, 99.3%, 95.6%, 62.2%, and 65.3%, respectively. When evaluated in the context of participating centers, the prevalence of anti-Rib-P antibodies was found in descending frequency, as follows: China (35%) > Poland (34%) > Japan (28%) > United States (26%) > Germany (Freiburg; 23.3%) > Denmark (20.5%) > Germany (Berlin; 19%) > Mexico (15.7%) > Israel (11.7%) > Brazil (10%) > Canada (8%). The substantial data from this study indicate that the prevalence of anti-Rib-P antibodies may not be restricted to the genetic background of the patients or to the detection system but may depend on regional practice differences and patient selection. We confirm previously reported associations of antiribosomal antibodies with clinical symptoms and serological findings. Remarkably, we found a lower occurrence of serositis in Rib-P-positive lupus patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".