Re Jointstat is the name of the new test for RA developed by Augurex based on new protein 14-3-3n.

[Damaged]

It is 90% accurate at identifying Rheumatoid Arthritis. The text is available in Canada via Life labs and in the US and Europe. If you Google Augurex the details are readily available. They intend to develop a new Biologic treatment using this auto antibody. Stay tuned for updates. I think it is welcomed news for the individuals who are seronegative but there is very interesting features of this research that is fascinating. A targeted treatment approach. 

[flow4]

I agree the targeted treatment approach is interesting - designing a new drug that specifically targets a specific protein is a new way of doing things, I think, and seems sensible.

I'm a bit skeptical about the claims made for this new test, though. 99% of the info I can find is produced by the company itself, which obviously has a good press department and researchers who are very enthusiastic about its potential. You could say, a bit biased! When I looked for peer-reviewed, published research, I didn't find much (only one definitely peer-reviewed, though maybe I missed others), and there are obvious short-comings to the studies I did find, such as using very small study groups (only about 30 people), unclear selection criteria and non-standard statistical tests...

I think this is definitely one to watch, but I'd be surprised if the test turns out to be as significant as the company claims.

These seem to be the most relevant studies:

jrheum.org/content/41/11/21...

sciencedirect.com/science/a...

arthritis-research.biomedce... 

Here's the full google scholar search: bit.ly/1MDGYpi

[oldtimer in reply to flow4]

Thanks for the results of your search. It does look very early in the research.

[helixhelix]

I'm always pleased about new research, as eventually it should lead to better care. But not hugely optimistic about timescales!

And also for it to be used in the UK it would have to be proved that this was cost-effective not just for one individual but on a bigger scale.  New tests are often v expensive, and so they'd have to show it was better than RF, anti-CCP and an ultrasound - which is the approach here. 

[Damaged]

Thank you for replies. It is very early in the process and unproven. However, there is not a great deal of original studies out there. I am looking for any and all positive outlooks. Things seem rather bleak at the moment.