ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 265

Frequency of Performing Anti dsDNA Antibody in an ANA Negative Patient with Clinical Suspicion of SLE in a Single Centre Trial Before and After the Publication of National Guideline

Pamela Anjara 1, David Liew2, Victor Yang 3, Christopher McMaster 2 and Russell Buchanan 3, 1Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 2Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: ANA, anti-dsDNA, SLE and health behaviors

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 10, 2019

Title: Health Services Research Poster I – ACR/ARP

Session Type: Poster Session (Sunday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: In October 2017, the Australian Rheumatology Association widely promoted a list of five recommendations on low-value practices to general clinicians and patients as part of the peer-reviewed Evolve initiative. One recommendation in keeping with international guidelines suggested avoiding ordering anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies (dsDNA) in anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) negative patients unless there was a high clinical suspicion of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE). Inappropriate anti dsDNA antibody ordering confers a substantial and unnecessary cost on health resources.
We sought to compare ANA and anti dsDNA antibody ordering practices in a large tertiary teaching hospital before and after the Evolve recommendations were promoted.

Methods: Results of ANA and dsDNA testing ordered through the institutional laboratory of a large tertiary teaching hospital between 2012-2018 inclusive were captured, as were data paired to these tests including age, gender and the ordering medical specialty. Analysis was performed on results ordered between January 1 and March 31 of each year. Retrospective chart review of ANA negative patients with dsDNA testing ordered was performed to review the indication for testing and the presence of component clinical criteria from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Classification (SLICC) Criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Results: A total of 24,501 ANA tests were performed between January 1, 2012 and August 16, 2018. Of these, 5216 patients had ANA tests ordered between January 1 and March 31 in any year, with 3071 having returned a negative ANA result and 803 of these having also had a dsDNA ordered (Table 1). The majority of these patients had no history of any SLICC clinical criteria (486, 60.5%). Very few ANA negative patients who did not meet SLICC criteria had positive dsDNA (14, 2.8%) and all were low titre. None of these dsDNA results were relevant to the patient’s eventual diagnosis. There was a marked reduction in dsDNA ordering following the promotion of the Evolve recommendations starting October 2017, from 96 patients during January – March 2017 to 28 patients during Januaryy – March 2018 (Figure 1).

Conclusion: A majority of patients who had dsDNA testing ordered despite a negative ANA result had no clinical features of SLE. There has been a marked reduction in the ordering of dsDNA testing in ANA negative

Table 1. Results

Figure 1. Reduction of anti dsDNA antibody ordering after publication of national recommendation


Disclosure: P. Anjara, None; D. Liew, None; V. Yang, None; C. McMaster, None; R. Buchanan, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Anjara P, Liew D, Yang V, McMaster C, Buchanan R. Frequency of Performing Anti dsDNA Antibody in an ANA Negative Patient with Clinical Suspicion of SLE in a Single Centre Trial Before and After the Publication of National Guideline [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/frequency-of-performing-anti-dsdna-antibody-in-an-ana-negative-patient-with-clinical-suspicion-of-sle-in-a-single-centre-trial-before-and-after-the-publication-of-national-guideline/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/frequency-of-performing-anti-dsdna-antibody-in-an-ana-negative-patient-with-clinical-suspicion-of-sle-in-a-single-centre-trial-before-and-after-the-publication-of-national-guideline/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology