Reply to Lerma et al.

✍ Scribed by Lydie Meheus; Ann Union

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1996
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 55 KB
• Volume: 10
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0887-8013
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2825(1996)10:1<57::aid-jcla10>3.0.co;2-p

✦ Synopsis

Letter to the Editor

As we are involved in the evaluation of recombinant autoantigens, we have read the article by Lerma et al., "Evaluation of Recombinant Ro/SSA, La/SSB, Sm, and U1 RNP Autoantigens in Clinical Diagnosis" with great interest (1).

However, there was one particular conclusion in that article with which we could not agree. In our experience, recombinant SmD does not give satisfactory results when used for the diagnosis of SLE, an observation that is equally made by other groups (2,3). Consequently, we were extremely surprised to see that a commercial test would include recombinant Srn. Detailed reading of the product insert of the RheumELISA Sm demonstrated that this test is based on purified Sm antigen, in contrast to the RheumELISA tests for SSA, SSB, and U1-RNP, which employ recombinant DNA technology to produce purified autoantigens. In addition, the fact that native purified Sm material is used in the ELISA was confirmed to us by the manufacturer.

Tn view of these data, we think it would be meaningful to publish a correction in the Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis because Sm is an important antigen in autoimmune diagnostics and your conclusion on the diagnostic value of recombinant Sm could lead to serious confusion.