Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25788544›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015

Has CXCL13 an added value in diagnosis of neurosyphilis?

Khutso M Mothapo, Marcel M Verbeek, Lieven B van der Velden, C Wim Ang, Peter P Koopmans, Andre van der Ven, Foekje Stelma

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Canadian Public Health Laboratory Network (CPHLN) Diagnostic Recommendations for Neurosyphilis in Canada.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Analysis ofInfection and drug resistance · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Khutso M MothapoDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nijmegen Institute for Infection, Inflammation and Immunity, Division of Infectious Diseases, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Khutso.Mothapo@radboudumc.nl.
Marcel M VerbeekDepartments of Neurology and Laboratory Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Lieven B van der VeldenDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands PAMM (Laboratory for Pathology and Microbiology), Veldhoven, The Netherlands.
C Wim AngDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Peter P KoopmansDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nijmegen Institute for Infection, Inflammation and Immunity, Division of Infectious Diseases, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Andre van der VenDepartment of Internal Medicine and Nijmegen Institute for Infection, Inflammation and Immunity, Division of Infectious Diseases, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Foekje StelmaDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In patients with syphilis, central nervous system (CNS) involvement is often difficult to determine. In patients who also are infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), this is even more challenging, as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pleocytosis can be attributed to HIV, syphilis, or both. Hence, this study investigated (i) CSF chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 13 (CXCL13) as a potential marker to diagnose neurosyphilis in HIV-infected individuals and (ii) the added value of CSF CXCL13 to conventional CSF biomarkers, such as the rapid plasma reagin test (RPR), in diagnosing neurosyphilis. We included 103 syphilis patients from two centers in The Netherlands: 47 non-HIV-infected patients and 56 HIV-infected patients. A positive CSF-RPR was regarded as the gold standard for neurosyphilis. CSF CXCL13 levels were significantly higher in neurosyphilis patients when neurosyphilis was diagnosed by CSF-RPR (P = 0.0002) than in the syphilis control group. The sensitivity and specificity of CSF CXCL13 (cutoff of 76.3 pg/ml) to diagnose neurosyphilis by using positive CSF-RPR as the gold standard were 50% and 90%, respectively. CSF CXCL13 had an added value to CSF-RPR positivity in 70% of HIV-positive patients and in 33% of HIV-negative patients. Our data show that CSF CXCL13 might be a potential additional marker in neurosyphilis when other markers are not conclusive. The added value of CSF CXCL13 measurement to the current neurosyphilis gold standard appears to benefit HIV-positive patients more than HIV-negative patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersChemokine CXCL13Diagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsNeurosyphilisSensitivity and SpecificityYoung AdultBiomarkersChemokine CXCL13CXCL13 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID25788544
PMCPMC4400737
OpenAlexW1971290028

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.