Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 31, 2026
Quantification of dsDNA using the Hitachi F-7000 Fluorescence Spectrophotometer and PicoGreen Dye
Published on: November 5, 2010
Comparison of quantitative and qualitative anti-dsDNA assays
Rajeevan Selvaratnam1,2, Pooja Srivastava3, Danyel H Tacker4
1Laboratory Services, BayCare Health System, Tampa, FL, US.
Objective:
In evaluation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies (anti-dsDNA) play a significant role in diagnosis, monitoring SLE activity, and assessing prognosis. However, evaluations of the performance and limitations for recently developed methods for anti-dsDNA assessment are sparse.
Methods:
Specimens used for antinuclear antibody testing (n = 129) were evaluated for anti-dsDNA assay comparability across 4 medical centers in the United States. The methods compared were Werfen Quanta Lite dsDNA, Zeus Scientific dsDNA Enzyme Immunoassay, Bio-Rad multiplex immunoassay (MIA) dsDNA, ImmunoConcepts Crithidia, and Bio-Rad Laboratories Crithidia.
Results:
For quantitative anti-dsDNA measurements, Spearman's correlation coefficient was highest between Zeus and Werfen (ρ = 0.86; CI, 0.81-0.90; P < .0001). Comparison of MIA to Werfen or Zeus yielded similar results to each other (ρ = 0.58; CI, 0.44-0.68; P < .0001; and ρ = 0.59; CI, 0.46-0.69; P < .0001, respectively), but lower than the correlation between Zeus and Werfen. Positive concordance between assays ranged from 31.4% to 97.1%, and negative concordance between assays ranged from 58.5% to 100%. The detection of anti-dsDNA in those with SLE diagnosis ranged from 50.9% to 77.4% for quantitative assays and 15.1% to 24.5% for Crithidia assays.
Conclusion:
Current quantitative anti-dsDNA assays are not interchangeable for patient follow-up. Crithidia-based assays demonstrate high negative concordance and lack positive concordance among the methods.
