ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2010
Proteomic analyses lead to a better understanding of celiac disease: focus on epitope recognition and autoantibodies.
Review in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Screening of Critical Related Genes in Celiac Disease Based on Intraepithelial Lymphocytes Investigation: A Bioinformatics Analysis.Galen medical journal · 2019Article
- Protein-protein interaction network of celiac disease.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2016Article
- Overexpression of Hsp70 confers cytoprotection during gliadin exposure in Caco-2 cells.Pediatric research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proteomic technologies are being used with increasing frequency in the scientific community. In this review, we have highlighted their use in celiac disease (CD). The available techniques, which include two-dimensional (2D) gel electrophoresis, mass spectrometry, and antibody and tissue arrays, have been used to identify proteins or changes in protein expression specific to gut tissue from patients with CD. A number of studies have employed proteomic methodologies to determine the diagnostic biomarkers in body fluids or to examine changes in protein expression and posttranslational modifications during signaling. A fast technological development of these methods, along with the combination of classic techniques with proteomics, will lead to new discoveries, which will consent a better understanding of the pathogenesis of CD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.