4.5 Article

Low level autoantibodies can be frequently detected in the general Australian population

Journal

PATHOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages 483-490

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2016.03.014

Keywords

Autoantibody; general Australian population; Busselton Health Study; background frequency

Categories

Funding

  1. PathWest Research Grant
  2. Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy Research Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and type of autoantibodies in a general Australian population cohort. Samples collected from 198 individuals included in a cross sectional Busselton Health Study were tested using auto antibody assays routinely performed at Clinical Immunology, PathWest Laboratory Medicine, Western Australia. At least one autoantibody was detected in 51.5% of individuals (males = 45.1%, females = 58.3%). The most frequently detected serum autoantibodies were anti-beta-2-glycoprotein I (12.1%) followed by anti-smooth muscle (11.6%) and anti-thyroid peroxidase (8.6%). Vasculitis associated anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies were present in 5.1%, while anti-nuclear antibodies were detected in 8.6% of individuals. Notably, 65% of positive results were detected at low levels with the exception of anti-myeloperoxidase and anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgG antibodies. Autoantibodies are commonly detected at low levels in a predominantly Australian or European population cohort. No large Australian study has yet provided these data for contemporary routine tests. This paper gives important information on the background frequency of autoantibodies in the general population. Due to the nature of this study we are unaware of whether these individuals have subsequently developed an autoimmune disease, however this was not clinically diagnosed at the time of sample collection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available