ArticleFrontiers in oncology2012
Oral Immunoglobulin Levels are Not a Good Surrogate for Cervical Immunoglobulin Levels.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Evaluation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 specific antibody measurements in saliva collected in oral rinses and merocel® sponges.Vaccine · 2018Article
- Salivary and serum HPV antibody levels before and after definitive treatment in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2017Article
- Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Induces HPV-Specific Antibodies in the Oral Cavity: Results From the Mid-Adult Male Vaccine Trial.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe sought to determine whether oral secretions could be used as a surrogate for cervical secretions for monitoring cervical immunoglobulin (Ig) levels. To do so, we examined (1) whether oral IgG and IgA levels correlated with those observed at the cervix, and (2) whether time of menstrual cycle and other factors previously reported to influence cervical Ig levels were associated with oral IgG and IgA levels.
methodsWe obtained oral samples from a group of 85 Costa Rican woman 25-35 years of age measured at three time points during one menstrual cycle. Total IgG and IgA levels were measured by ELISA. Generalized estimating equations methods that account for repeated measures were used to evaluate the association between oral and cervical Ig levels and to evaluate the association between various covariates and oral IgA and IgG levels.
resultsWe did not observe an association between oral and cervical IgG [linear regression coefficient (LRC) 0.01; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.07] and IgA levels (LRC 0.02; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.08). Oral IgG and IgA levels were not influenced by phase of menstrual cycle, in contrast to what has previously been observed for cervical Ig levels.
conclusionOur data suggest that oral IgG and IgA measures are not a good surrogate for cervical IgG and IgA levels. Future studies should examine whether antigen-specific antibody responses induced by vaccination correlate across mucosal sites.
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.