Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22996343›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2013

Serological muscle loss biomarkers: an overview of current concepts and future possibilities.

Anders Nedergaard, Morten A Karsdal, Shu Sun, Kim Henriksen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Temporalis muscle biomarkers from routine brain MRI and risk of dementia in two independent cohorts.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Wearable Bioelectronics for Home-Based Monitoring and Treatment of Muscle Atrophy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  7. Biomarkers of Extracellular Matrix Fragments in Patients with Psoriasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. A Pound of Flesh: What Cachexia Is and What It Is Not.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  13. Implications of Altered Endosome and Lysosome Biology in Space Environments.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Transmembrane protease serine 5: a novel Schwann cell plasma marker for CMT1A.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Relationship between skeletal muscle function, body composition, and weight loss in patients with advanced pancreatic and gastrointestinal cancers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anders NedergaardNordic Bioscience, Herlev Hovedgade 207, 2730, Herlev, Denmark, anders.fabricius.nedergaard@gmail.com.
Morten A Karsdal
Shu Sun
Kim Henriksen
Nordic Bioscience (Denmark) · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe skeletal muscle mass is the largest organ in the healthy body, comprising 30-40 % of the body weight of an adult man. It confers protection from trauma, locomotion, ventilation, and it represents a "sink" in glucose metabolism and a reservoir of amino acids to other tissues such as the brain and blood cells. Naturally, loss of muscle has dire consequences for health as well as functionality. Muscle loss is a natural consequence of especially aging, inactivity, and their associated metabolic dysfunction, but it is strongly accelerated in critical illness such as organ failure, sepsis, or cancer. Whether this muscle loss is considered a primary or secondary condition, it is known that muscle loss is a symptom that predicts morbidity and mortality and one that is known to impact quality of life and independence. Therefore, monitoring of muscle mass is relevant in a number of pathologies as well as in clinical trials as measures of efficacy as well as safety. METHODS AND

resultsExisting biomarkers of muscle mass or muscle loss have shown to be either too unreliable or too impractical in relation to the perceived clinical benefit to reach regular clinical research or use. We suggest serological neoepitope biomarkers as a possible technology to address some of these problems. Blood biomarkers of this kind have previously been shown to respond with high sensitivity and shorter time to minimum significant change than available biomarkers of muscle mass. We provide brief reviews of existing muscle mass or function biomarker technologies, muscle protein biology, and existing neoepitope biomarkers and proceed to present tentative recommendations on how to select and detect neoepitope biomarkers.

conclusionWe suggest that serological peptide biomarkers whose tissue and pathology specificity are derived from post-translational modification of proteins in tissues of interest, presenting so-called neoepitopes, represents an exciting candidate technology to fill out an empty niche in biomarker technology.

Identifiers

PMID22996343
PMCPMC3581612
OpenAlexW2039509275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.