Medical Analysis

Comprehensive Evaluation of Antinuclear Antibody Profiles, Autoimmune Connective Tissue Diseases, and Anti-SS-A (Ro) Biomarkers

Introduction to Antinuclear Antibodies and Autoimmune Connective Tissue Disease Markers

The antinuclear antibody (ANA) profile serves as a core diagnostic cornerstone and a definitive feature in the clinical evaluation of autoimmune connective tissue diseases [1]. ANAs represent a diverse and clinically significant class of autoantibodies that bind specifically to cellular components situated within the nucleus, encompassing critical structures such as nuclear proteins, double-stranded and single-stranded DNA, RNA strands, and complex nucleic acid-protein macromolecular assemblies [17]. While finding a minimal baseline count of antinuclear antibodies in standard blood circulation can occasionally present as a normal physiological variation within healthy individuals, the detection of a significantly elevated titer or concentration frequently acts as a reliable sentinel warning sign of an underlying systemic autoimmune disorder [8]. In these pathological states, the patient’s immune system erroneously mounts an aggressive and misguided attack against healthy cells, specific tissues, and vital organ systems, which can ultimately culminate in severe, progressive, and life-altering health complications [1]. Consequently, comprehensive ANA screening remains an indispensable preliminary diagnostic tool for identifying, categorizing, and monitoring systemic autoimmune pathologies across modern clinical practice [8]. Expanding upon this foundational screening framework, specialized diagnostic markers such as the anti-SS-A (anti-Sjögren’s syndrome related antigen A) antibody—frequently referenced as the anti-Ro antibody—play an even more granular role [9]. An anti SS-A antibody is an autoantibody produced by the aberrant humoral immune system that specifically targets the SSA protein, also universally recognized as the Ro antigen, which is abundantly expressed across various nucleated cells throughout the human body [17]. These specialized autoantibodies are heavily intertwined with a broad spectrum of complex systemic autoimmune diseases, most notably systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjögren’s syndrome, neonatal lupus, systemic sclerosis, polymyositis, and rheumatoid arthritis [1]. Furthermore, contemporary molecular immunology categorizes these targets into specific subcomponents, where SSA-52 (Ro52) and SSA-60 (Ro60) antibodies exhibit strong clinical associations with the precise diagnosis of Sjögren’s syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and systemic sclerosis, with the SSA-52 antibody demonstrating a particularly notable clinical overlap with major systemic sclerosis-related autoantibody panels [10].

Detailed Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Autoantigen Targets of ANA and Anti-SS-A Antibody Types

The pathogenic cascade involving anti-SSA/Ro antibodies begins at the cellular level, where SSA/Ro antibodies are synthesized against specific ribonucleic acid-associated proteins residing natively within the nuclear and cytoplasmic compartments of healthy cells, thereby classifying these autoantibodies as specialized subsets of antinuclear autoantibodies [17]. Within this pathological framework, the host’s immune system erroneously shifts from surveillance to assault, launching destructive immunological responses against healthy somatic cells instead of neutralizing genuine external pathogens [1]. Concurrently, specialized white blood cells (WBCs) infiltrate and target vital moisture-producing exocrine glands, resulting in profound functional impairment where the body loses its physiological ability to generate adequate tears, saliva, and essential bodily secretions [9]. Sjögren’s syndrome itself manifests primarily in two distinct forms: primary Sjögren’s syndrome, which develops autonomously as an independent autoimmune condition without a preceding systemic trigger, and secondary Sjögren’s syndrome, which develops concurrently on top of pre-existing systemic autoimmune diseases such as psoriatic arthritis or rheumatoid arthritis [9]. The detailed pathophysiology of Anti-SSA autoantibodies involves five distinct sequential phases: first, targeting cytoplasmic and nuclear Ro proteins that are fundamentally involved in normal cellular RNA processing [17]; second, antibody binding with Ro proteins that incites localized tissue injury and sustained chronic inflammation [1]; third, the critical capacity of maternal IgG autoantibodies to cross the placental barrier, exposing the developing fetus to risks such as neonatal lupus or congenital heart block; fourth, direct interference with specialized ion channels within fetal and adult myocardial tissues, leading to serious electrical conduction abnormalities including atrioventricular (AV) block, QT prolongation, and contributing directly to myocardial fibrosis; and fifth, establishing an overall heightened clinical risk profile where these autoantibodies serve as powerful indicators for severe systemic manifestations [16]. To fully comprehend the scope of these targets, the classification of ANA and specific extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) is outlined below:

Clinical Evaluation of Presenting Musculoskeletal, Dermatological, Systemic, and Neurological Symptoms

Patients presenting with elevated ANA titers and specific anti-SSA/Ro positivity typically display a wide-ranging constellation of clinical manifestations across multiple organ systems. Musculoskeletal presenting symptoms are exceedingly common and feature persistent joint pain (arthralgia), joint stiffness, overt joint swelling and inflammation (arthritis), muscle weakness, and inflammatory myositis [10]. Dermatological manifestations frequently feature a characteristic malar rash (the classic butterfly-shaped rash across the bridge of the nose and cheeks), heightened photosensitivity where the skin reacts abnormally and violently to ultraviolet sunlight exposure, non-scarring alopecia (hair loss), subacute cutaneous lupus lesions, and progressive skin tightness resembling scleroderma [10]. Systemic signs involve debilitating chronic fatigue and general malaise, unexplained fevers of unknown origin, and recurrent painful oral ulcers [1]. Vascular and neurological symptoms encompass Raynaud’s phenomenon (where fingers and toes turn white, blue, and cold in response to cold temperatures or emotional stress), vasculitis manifestations affecting peripheral skin and nerves, focal neurological symptoms including numbness and severe tingling, and extreme mucosal dryness affecting the eyes and mouth typical of Sjögren’s syndrome [9]. Expanding upon these clinical presentations, common symptoms that specifically necessitate ordering an Anti-SS-A Antibody Test include persistent dryness in the nose, dry skin, cracked lips, chronic throat dryness, debilitating fatigue, shortness of breath, a persistent dry cough, swollen neck and face glands, dry eyes accompanied by itching and burning sensations, a constant cottonmouth feeling in the mouth, acid reflux or heartburn, constant chronic headaches, frequent skin rashes coupled with increased UV light sensitivity, difficulty focusing or remembering things (brain fog), numbness in specific bodily extremities, an abnormal altered sense of taste, blurry vision, and accelerated tooth decay alongside other complex dental issues [9].

Diagnostic Overview of the ANA Antibody Test and Anti-SS-A Assay Specifications

The foundational ANA test is a qualitative and semi-quantitative blood screening assay designed specifically to detect the presence and concentration of circulating antinuclear antibodies in patient serum [6]. Complementing this initial screen, the specialized anti-SS-A (Ro) antibody test is a targeted diagnostic blood assay that precisely measures the exact concentration levels of these specific autoantibodies in the blood [12]. This specialized assay is routinely utilized by clinicians to further investigate and confirm diagnoses in patients presenting with complex connective tissue complaints alongside a positive initial antinuclear antibodies (ANA) test result [6]. From a biochemical perspective, SS-A/Ro is classified as a major extractable nuclear antigen that demonstrates strong statistical association with positive autoantibodies found in approximately ninety percent of Sjögren’s syndrome patients and forty to sixty percent of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients [9]. Furthermore, clinical guidelines dictate specific indications for ordering the Anti-SS-A test, which include suspected systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Sjögren’s syndrome/SLE overlap syndromes, subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE), neonatal lupus risk assessments, primary biliary cirrhosis, and rheumatoid arthritis, noting additionally that anti-La/SSB antibodies show an even tighter specific association with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (SS) [9].

Detailed Pathological Indications, Affected Body Parts, and Clinical Manifestations

To understand the systemic breadth of these autoimmune disorders, the pathological indications, targeted body parts, and associated clinical manifestations must be evaluated systematically:

Additionally, when a rheumatologic or connective tissue disorder is strongly suspected, clinicians order the Anti-SSA antibody test for specific conditions such as photosensitivity or subacute cutaneous lupus, primary Sjögren’s syndrome, cutaneous vasculitis accompanied by palpable purpura, interstitial lung disease, neonatal lupus evaluations, congenital heart block screening, ANA-negative SLE presentations involving active nephritis, vasculitis, lymphadenopathy, or leukopenia, homozygous C2 and C4 complement deficiencies presenting with an SLE-like disease, rheumatoid factor positivity paired with severe systemic symptoms, and SLE complicated by interstitial pneumonitis [9].

Laboratory Methods of Detection for Antinuclear Antibodies and Anti-SS-A Biomarkers

Accurate identification of antinuclear antibodies and extractable nuclear antigens relies upon a diverse array of advanced laboratory detection methodologies [18]. These standardized techniques encompass qualitative Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), semi-quantitative Indirect Fluorescent Antibody (IFA) testing, indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIF), indirect immunofluorescence antinuclear antibody tests (IF-ANA), enzyme and multiplex bead immunoassays, and solid-phase immunoassays [13]. Furthermore, the estimation and characterization of specific anti-SS-A (Ro) biomarkers utilize a comprehensive technical repertoire including general Immunoassay (IA), Indirect Immunofluorescence (IIF), Countercurrent Immunoelectrophoresis (CIEP), Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), Western Blot (WB), Double Immunodiffusion (DID), Multiplex Flow Immunoassay, Immunoblotting (IB), and Immunoprecipitation (IP) techniques [14].

Pre-Analytical Guidelines Before Sample Collection and Specimen Processing Protocols

Proper pre-analytical management ensures maximum diagnostic accuracy for both general ANA and specialized Anti-SS-A panels [6]. No special patient preparation, dietary restrictions, or fasting is required prior to undergoing an ANA or Anti-Ro blood test [6]. Regarding specimen collection and tube specifications, the standard protocol dictates drawing a blood sample by collecting exactly 3.0 ml of venous blood into a plain laboratory tube equipped with a red cap [6]. Following collection, laboratory processing requires separating the liquid serum component from cellular elements as rapidly and early as possible, after which the isolated serum must be promptly transported and dispatched to the analytical laboratory under temperature-controlled conditions [6].

Standard Reference Ranges and Clinical Significance Summary for ANA and Anti-SS-A Titers

Laboratory reporting utilizes standardized reference ranges and titer thresholds to categorize clinical risk and autoimmune activity [11]:

Similarly, specific reference ranges and quantitative thresholds for anti-SS-A and its molecular subcomponents provide clear diagnostic boundaries [9]. For standard Anti-SS-A antibody assays, normal results fall below 1.0 U indicating a negative status, while abnormal results at or exceeding 1.0 U indicate a positive finding. More granular quantitative interpretations include general Sjögren’s Syndrome A (SSA) Antibody levels below 25 IU as negative, 25 to 30 IU as borderline positive, 30 to 60 IU as low positive, 60 to 200 IU as positive, and values exceeding 200 IU as strong positive [9]. For individual IgG ENA subcomponents, SSA-52 (Ro52) IgG antibody levels of 29 AU/mL or less are reported as negative, intermediate ranges are equivocal, and values of 41 AU/mL or greater are positive [10]. Likewise, SSA-60 (Ro60) IgG antibody levels of 29 AU/mL or less are negative, 30 to 40 AU/mL are equivocal, and 41 AU/mL or greater are categorized as positive [10].

Interpretation Guidelines for Canine and Feline Antinuclear Antibody Testing

Veterinary diagnostics also incorporate ANA testing standards [16]. For canine antinuclear antibody testing, the assay is highly sensitive but lacks strict specificity for canine SLE [16]. A negative titer (less than or equal to 1:40) argues strongly against active canine SLE, whereas low positive titers may appear in geriatric patients or inflammatory states, and high titers (greater than or equal to 1:80) accompanied by clinical findings point toward SLE, necessitating mandatory clinical correlation [16]. For feline antinuclear antibody testing, negative results argue against active SLE, low titers (less than or equal to 1:20) are non-specific, and high titers (greater than or equal to 1:40) coupled with laboratory findings indicate feline SLE [16].

ANA Test Patterns and Associated Autoimmune Diseases

Microscopic evaluation of immunofluorescence patterns yields vital diagnostic clues [10]:

Comparative Analysis: ANA IFA Versus ELISA Screening and Clinical Applications

Comparative evaluations demonstrate that ELISA results reported as detected must undergo mandatory reflex testing via indirect fluorescent assay (IFA) utilizing HEp-2 cell substrates with an IgG-specific conjugate [10]. The ANA ELISA screen detects antibodies against dsDNA, histones, SS-A (Ro), SS-B (La), Smith, Smith/RNP, Scl-70, Jo-1, and centromeric proteins [12]. Clinically, ANA IFA assays exhibit superior sensitivity for detecting systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD) compared to standard ELISA screens [14], though negative results do not completely rule out SARD [7]. Broad clinical applications include diagnosing Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) via high homogeneous and peripheral patterns [1]; Systemic Sclerosis via nucleolar and centromere patterns [10]; Sjögren’s Syndrome via predominant speckled patterns and anti-SSA positivity [9]; Mixed Connective Tissue Disease (MCTD) via speckled patterns and anti-RNP antibodies; Inflammatory Myopathies via speckled or cytoplasmic patterns [10]; Drug-Induced Lupus via homogeneous patterns and anti-histone antibodies [15]; and Autoimmune Hepatitis via frequent homogeneous ANA positivity. Furthermore, specific clinical applications for Anti-SS-A include serving as a diagnostic marker for Sjögren’s syndrome linked to glandular dysfunction; providing diagnostic and prognostic value in SLE involving cutaneous and neonatal complications; identifying critical fetal risks to guide obstetric monitoring and prevention; and detecting overlap syndromes [9].

Therapeutic Implications, Clinical Relevance, and Diagnostic Limitations

Therapeutic management strategies and clinical relevance are structured across multiple dimensions:

Additionally, therapeutic implications specifically tied to Anti-SS-A positivity include utilizing immunosuppressive agents to treat Sjögren’s syndrome and SLE symptoms while reducing inflammation; implementing fetal risk management via steroids and intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) to prevent neonatal lupus and congenital heart block; delivering symptom-based therapy for skin, joint, and systemic manifestations; administering cardiac treatments including antiarrhythmics and pacemakers for conduction abnormalities; and providing supportive care to optimize quality of life [9]. Finally, diagnostic limitations dictate that a definitive clinical diagnosis must never be established solely on a single test result, as results require comprehensive clinical correlation by a physician [7]. Factors such as advanced age naturally increase baseline ANA positivity in both males and females [11], while specific pharmacological agents—including various antibiotics, tranquilizers, aspirin, and oral contraceptive birth control pills—can induce temporary lupus-like conditions characterized by elevated ANA and anti-Ro titers, which typically resolve into sustained clinical remission following the prompt discontinuation of the triggering medication [15].

For Non-Medicos.

Patient-Friendly Guide to Understanding Antinuclear Antibody (ANA), Anti-SS-A Testing, and Autoimmune Health

What Are Antinuclear Antibodies and Anti-SS-A Explained Simply

Antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) and specialized markers like Anti-SS-A (also known as Anti-Ro) are specialized proteins produced by your immune system that mistakenly target and attack healthy components residing inside the nucleus and cells of your own body, such as vital DNA, RNA, and cellular proteins [17]. While having a very tiny, trace amount of these antibodies in your blood can be completely normal, possessing high levels frequently serves as an important warning sign of an autoimmune disorder where your body attacks its own tissues and organs [1]. These specialized blood tests act as crucial initial screening tools to help doctors investigate systemic autoimmune conditions [8].

Common Types of Autoantibodies and Associated Conditions

Different categories of autoantibodies target specific parts of cells and point toward distinct medical conditions [17]. For instance, anti-dsDNA points toward Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), anti-histone links to drug-induced lupus [15], and anti-Ro (SS-A) or anti-La (SSB) are closely associated with Sjögren’s syndrome, neonatal lupus, and systemic sclerosis [9]. Specialized antibodies like anti-centromere are tied to limited systemic sclerosis (CREST syndrome) [10], while anti-RNP points toward mixed connective tissue disease.

Recognizing Symptoms That Prompt an ANA and Anti-SS-A Test

Physicians frequently recommend an ANA and Anti-SS-A blood test when patients report symptoms across multiple body systems. Common signs include persistent dry eyes, dry mouth, swollen neck and face glands, chronic fatigue, joint pain, muscle pain, skin photosensitivity, Raynaud’s phenomenon (fingers turning blue or cold), oral ulcers, rashes, vaginal dryness, tooth decay, dry cough, shortness of breath, numbness in extremities, and potential fetal complications like neonatal lupus or congenital heart block if mothers test positive [9].

Understanding the Blood Test Procedure and Preparation

The ANA and Anti-Ro tests are simple routine blood draws designed to detect these nuclear-targeting antibodies [6]. No special preparation, fasting, or dietary restrictions are required prior to your appointment [6]. A trained healthcare professional will collect approximately 3.0 ml of your blood into a plain red-capped tube, promptly separate the liquid serum from the blood cells, and dispatch the sample safely to the laboratory for detailed analysis [6].

Understanding Conditions Linked to Positive Results

Positive test results are tied to several major autoimmune conditions [1]. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) impacts joints, skin, heart, lungs, blood vessels, kidneys, and brain [5]. Other associated conditions include scleroderma (affecting skin and blood vessels), Sjögren’s syndrome (affecting tear and saliva-producing glands), autoimmune hepatitis (causing liver inflammation), rheumatoid arthritis, and primary biliary cirrhosis [9].

Laboratory Methods Used to Detect Autoantibodies

Laboratories utilize sophisticated technology to measure these antibodies, ranging from Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and Indirect Fluorescent Antibody (IFA) testing using specialized cell substrates [10] to multiplex flow immunoassays, western blotting, and immunoprecipitation methods, ensuring high diagnostic sensitivity [14].

Understanding Titers, Reference Ranges, and Quantitative Results

Test results are reported using titers and numerical units [9]. For general ANA, a titer below 1:40 is negative and normal, while values of 1:320 or higher indicate an increased likelihood of autoimmune disease. For Anti-SS-A testing, results below 1.0 U are negative, while values at or above 1.0 U are positive [9]. More granular antibody levels categorize values below 25 IU as negative, 25 to 30 IU as borderline, 30 to 60 IU as low positive, 60 to 200 IU as positive, and values exceeding 200 IU as strong positive [9].

Understanding Microscopic Test Patterns

When laboratory technicians examine your blood under a microscope, fluorescent patterns offer critical diagnostic clues [10]. Homogeneous patterns suggest lupus, speckled patterns point toward Sjögren’s syndrome or mixed connective tissue disease, peripheral patterns suggest active lupus, and nucleolar or centromere patterns strongly indicate systemic sclerosis [10].

Therapeutic Implications and Why Monitoring Matters

Doctors utilize these antibody results and repeat testing to track how well medical treatments are working, predict potential disease flare-ups, guide decisions on starting or adjusting immunosuppressive medications, assess long-term prognosis, manage fetal health risks during pregnancy, and deliver targeted supportive and cardiac care [9].

Important Limitations and Factors Affecting Results

While these tests are very sensitive, they are not completely specific, meaning a positive result does not automatically confirm a disease on its own [7]. Furthermore, antibody levels naturally increase as people age [11], and certain common medications—including antibiotics, tranquilizers, aspirin, and birth control pills—can temporarily trigger lupus-like conditions with high titers, which typically resolve once the medication is stopped [15].

References:

1. Tan, E. M. (1989). Antinuclear antibodies: diagnostic markers for autoimmune diseases and probes for cell biology. Advances in Immunology, 44, 93-151.

2. Agmon-Levin, N., Damoiseaux, J., Kallenberg, C., Sack, U., Witte, T., Herold, M., … & Shoenfeld, Y. (2014). International recommendations for the assessment of autoantibodies to cellular antigens referred to as anti-nuclear antibodies. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 73(1), 17-23.

3. Chan, E. K., Damoiseaux, J., Carballo, O. G., Conrad, K., de Melo Cruvinel, W., Francescantonio, P. L., … & Andrade, L. E. (2015). Report on the first international consensus on standardized nomenclature of antinuclear antibody HEp-2 cell patterns 2014-2015. Frontiers in Immunology, 6, 412.

4. Hahn, B. H., McMahon, M. A., Wilkinson, A., Wallace, W. D., Daikh, D. I., Fitzgerald, J. D., … & American College of Rheumatology. (2012). American College of Rheumatology guidelines for screening, treatment, and management of lupus nephritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 64(6), 797-808.

5. Petri, M., Orbai, A. M., Alarcón, G. S., Gordon, C., Merrill, J. T., Fortin, P. R., … & Bernatsky, S. (2012). Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 64(8), 2677-2686.

6. Kavanaugh, A., Tomar, R., Reveille, J., Solomon, D. H., & Homburger, H. A. (2000). Guidelines for clinical use of the antinuclear antibody test and tests for specific autoantibodies to nuclear antigens. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 124(1), 71-81.

7. Slater, C. A., Davis, R. B., & Shmerling, R. H. (1996). Antinuclear antibody testing: A study of clinical utility. Archives of Internal Medicine, 156(13), 1421-1425.

8. Meroni, P. L., & Schur, P. H. (2010). ANA screening: an old test with new recommendations. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 69(8), 1422-1425.

9. Tozzoli, R., Bizzaro, N., Giavarina, D., & Bassetti, D. (2002). Recommendations for the laboratory use of autoantibody tests in the diagnosis of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Clinical & Experimental Rheumatology, 20(3), S1-S6.

10. Damoiseaux, J., Andrade, L. E., Carballo, O. G., Conrad, K., Francescantonio, P. L., Fritzler, M. J., … & Chan, E. K. (2019). Clinical relevance of HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence patterns: the International Consensus on ANA Patterns (ICAP) perspective. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 78(7), 879-889.

11. Satoh, M., Chan, E. K., Ho, L. A., Rose, K. M., Parks, C. G., Cohn, R. D., … & Pollard, K. M. (2012). Prevalence and demographic associations of antinuclear antibodies in persons without connective tissue disease in the United States. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 64(7), 2319-2327.

12. Hagen, S. A., Schur, P. H., & Wright, E. A. (2002). Diagnostic utility of a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for antinuclear antibodies. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 47(2), 203-207.

13. Vermeersch, P., Blockmans, D., & Bossuyt, X. (2013). The changing role of solid-phase immunoassays for antinuclear antibody detection in systemic rheumatic disease. Autoimmunity Reviews, 12(3), 326-330.

14. Eriksson, C., Engstrand, S., Sundqvist, K. G., & Rödén, A. C. (2002). Autoantibody testing in patients with connective tissue diseases: the relative clinical value of ELISA compared to indirect immunofluorescence and immunoprecipitation. Journal of Rheumatology, 29(3), 481-489.

15. Rubin, R. L. (1999). Etiology and mechanisms of drug-induced lupus erythematosus. Current Opinion in Rheumatology, 11(5), 357-363.

16. Vasoo, S. (2006). Diagnostic and prognostic utility of antinuclear antibodies. Journal of Laboratory Physicians, 38(3), 172-182.

17. Tan, E. M., Chan, E. K., Sullivan, K. F., & Rubin, R. L. (1988). Antinuclear antibodies (ANA): diagnostically specific markers for autoimmune diseases and probes for cell biology. Molecular Biology & Medicine, 5(2), 67-87.

18. Kumar, Y., Bhatia, A., & Minz, R. W. (2009). Antinuclear antibodies and their detection methods in diagnosis of connective tissue diseases: a review. Open Rheumatology Journal, 3, 1-9.

19. Von Mühlen, C. A., & Tan, E. M. (1995). Autoantibodies in the diagnosis of systemic rheumatic diseases. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism, 24(5), 323-358.

20. Fritzler, M. J. (2011). The antinuclear antibody test: last or lasting gasp?. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 63(1), 19-22.