Anti-ribosomal and ‘P-peptide’-specific autoantibodies bind to T lymphocytes

Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) frequently have anti-lymphocyte autoantibodies, some of which also bind to surfaces of neurons. Since anti-ribosomal P protein autoantibodies (anti-P) from SLE patients also bind to surfaces of neurons, we hypothesized that anti-P are anti-lymphocyte antibodies. A panel of human T lymphocytes was evaluated for anti-P binding by indirect immunofluorescence. Affinity-purified anti-ribosomal antibodies were used as a source of anti-P. These autoantibodies bound to the surfaces of all transformed T cell lines tested. This binding was not mediated by Fc receptors. It was inhibitable by ribosomes. Anti-P bound to circulating T lymphocytes from healthy adults and children. They also bound to thymocytes and cord blood T cells from normal neonates. Circulating T cells from SLE patients with anti-P bound less anti-P than cells from healthy controls. Two patients were studied on multiple occasions. The capacity of their T cells to bind anti-P correlated inversely with titres of anti-ribosomal antibodies. Anti-ribosomal antibodies, other than anti-P, also appear to bind to T cells. The surface of T cells contains a protein with the size and antigenicity of the ribosomal P protein, P0. We conclude that anti-ribosomal antibodies are a subset of anti-lymphocyte autoantibodies. Their possible role in the pathogenesis of lymphopenia or lymphocyte dysfunction in SLE has to be defined in further studies.     

Using a ‘peer assessment questionnaire’ in primary medical care

BACKGROUND: Periodic assessment of clinician performance or 'revalidation' is being actively considered to reassure the public that doctors are 'up to date and fit to practice'. There is, therefore, increasing interest in how to assess individual clinician performance in a valid and reliable way. The use of peer assessment questionnaires is one of the methods being considered and investigated by the General Medical Council in the UK. AIM: To test the feasibility of using a peer assessment questionnaire in a primary care setting, and consider the related issues of validity and reliability and compare the results to previous studies. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey in a volunteer sample. SETTING: General practice in the UK. METHOD: GPs who volunteered to take part in an evaluation of a pilot appraisal implementation scheme were recruited by appraisers. These volunteers (GP subjects) chose 15 colleagues to complete a 'peer assessment' questionnaire that asked peers to make judgements about their clinical skills and other characteristics, such as 'compassion', 'integrity' and 'responsibility'. RESULTS: Of the 207 practitioners that agreed to be appraised, 113 completed the optional task of implementing the peer questionnaire. Of the 1271 raters, 1189 provided data about their roles and 33.6% of these were GPs. The data revealed significant levels of items where peers were 'unable to evaluate' the issues posed in the questionnaire (ranging from 13.7-1.8%). These rates differed from those obtained in studies based in the US where mean scores were slightly higher. Although the overall results are broadly similar to those previously obtained, there are sufficient differences to suggest that there are contextual issues influencing the interpretation of the items and therefore the scoring process. CONCLUSION: The volunteer sample in this study found no major obstacles to the implementation of the peer assessment questionnaire. While it is not possible to generalise from this selected volunteer sample, the use of peer assessment questionnaires appears feasible and may be acceptable to clinical practitioners. However, concern remains about the validity of such instruments and that their development did not fully consider issues of procedural justice or whether the overall purpose of the tools was to be formative, summative, or both.