ArticleLupus science & medicine2025
Anti-ribosomal-P protein antibodies and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): in a cross-sectional study of Danish adult patients with SLE, no significant association is found between anti-ribosomal-P and neuropsychiatric SLE.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sera of Healthy First-Degree Relatives of SLE Patients Contain Autoantibodies to Globular Domains of C1q.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Decoding Neuropsychiatric Lupus: A Systematic Review of Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate and Anti-ribosomal P Antibodies.Cureus · 2026Review
- Acute Psychosis as the Sole Initial Manifestation of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Diagnostic Challenge.Cureus · 2026Article
- Advancements in understanding neuropsychiatric lupus: deciphering immune heterogeneity with single-cell resolution.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary objective was to assess the prevalence of anti-ribosomal-P protein antibodies (anti-Rib-P) in a well-characterised Danish adult SLE cohort. Secondary objectives included (1) assessing any association between anti-Rib-P and neuropsychiatric SLE (NPSLE), (2) assessing any association between anti-Rib-P and characteristics of Danish patients with SLE and (3) assessing potential associations between selected autoantibodies and NPSLE.
methodThis cross-sectional study included 198 Danish patients with SLE from a population-based cohort. Patients meet the American College of Rheumatology's 1997 revised classification criteria for SLE and were 18 years of age or older. Anti-Rib-P were detected in serum using fluorescence enzyme immunoassay. ANA patterns were tested using indirect immunofluorescence on HEp-2 cells. Anti-double-stranded DNA antibody was examined by manual ELISA, and antibodies targeting Ro/SSA, La/SSB, Sm, RNP, Scl-70, Jo-1, Centromer B and Histone were examined on a Luminex instrument.
resultsWe identified 14 (7.1%) patients with anti-Rib-P positive SLE, and 3 anti-Rib-P positive patients were diagnosed with NPSLE (21% of patients with NPSLE). There was no statistically significant association between anti-Rib-P and NPSLE. The mean anti-Rib-P titres in the patients with NPSLE did not differ significantly from patients without NPSLE patients' titres. We observed a significant association between anti-Rib-P positivity and disease activity measured by the SLEDAI-2K (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000) score. A stepwise logistic regression found an association between NPSLE and SLEDAI-2K and SLICC DI (SLE International Collaborating Clinics Damage Index) score.
conclusionThis study could not confirm a role for anti-Rib-P in the identification of NPSLE. On the other hand, anti-Rib-P was associated with SLE disease activity as well as organ damage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.