CHARLES R. STEINMAN, M.D.
This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access.
To the editor: I read with interest the report of Chubick and associates (1) comparing the crithidial immunofluorescence (CL-IF) method for detecting antibodies to double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) with selected alternate assays. As is increasingly recognized, at least two sorts of information about the DNA antigen used in such assays are necessary for adequate evaluation of data and for duplication of results. First is careful definition of the antigenic sites present (particularly with regard to possible contamination, chiefly with single-stranded DNA [ssDNA] and perhaps nucleoprotein) as well as of the DNA size. Although the authors say they recognize the importance of
STEINMAN CR. Assay for Antibodies to Double-Stranded DNA. Ann Intern Med. 1979;90:128–129. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-90-1-128
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 1979;90(1):128-129.
Copyright © 2019 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use