Assessment of anti-malondialdehyde-acetaldehyde antibody frequencies in rheumatoid arthritis with new data from two independent cohorts, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

Table 1 Contrasts between the current study and the initial report in anti-MAA⁺ patients with RA

Patient set^a	N^b	IgG anti-MAA^c n (%)	p	IgM anti-MAA^c n (%)	p	IgA anti-MAA^c n (%)	p
All RA
Santiago	517	31 (6.0)	< 10⁻³¹⁰	76 (14.8)	< 10⁻²⁰	37 (7.2)	< 10⁻¹⁵⁰
Barcelona	178	13 (7.3)	< 10⁻¹⁸⁰	1 (0.6)	< 10⁻²⁰	23 (12.9)	< 10⁻⁵⁵
Thiele, 2015 [4]	1720	1582 (92.0)	Ref	654 (38.0)	Ref	1256 (73.0)	Ref
Anti-CCP⁺
Santiago	332	18 (5.4)	< 10⁻²⁴⁰	65 (19.7)	< 10⁻¹⁰	29 (8.8)	< 10⁻¹¹⁰
Barcelona	127	9 (7.1)	< 10⁻¹⁵⁰	1 (0.8)	< 10⁻¹⁵	17 (13.4)	< 10⁻⁴⁵
Thiele, 2015 [4]	1340	1246 (93.0)	Ref	549 (41.0)	Ref	1018 (76.0)	Ref
Anti-CCP⁻
Santiago	185	13 (7.0)	< 10⁻⁷⁵	11 (5.9)	< 10⁻⁹	8 (4.3)	< 10⁻³⁵
Barcelona	51	4 (7.8)	< 10⁻³⁵	0 (0)	< 10⁻⁵	6 (11.8)	< 10⁻¹⁰
Thiele, 2015 [4]	380	334 (87.9)	Ref	110 (28.9)	Ref	239 (62.9)	Ref

^aPatients with RA from the three collections were considered globally (All RA) and in the anti-CCP⁺ and anti-CCP⁻ subgroups
^bAbbreviations: N = total number of patients in each set; n = number of antibody positive patients; % = percentage of antibody positive patients; p = p value; Ref. = set used as a reference for comparison
^cThe number of anti-MAA antibody positive patients for each immunoglobulin isotype was determined using MAA-modified HSA as antigen and relative to the thresholds obtained with healthy controls in each collection, as detailed in the Material and methods

ISSN: 1478-6362