Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26168983›Full record

ReviewSeminars in immunopathology2015

Update on biomarkers in systemic sclerosis: tools for diagnosis and treatment.

Alsya J Affandi, Timothy R D J Radstake, Wioleta Marut

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in immunopathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Emerging Roles of Matricellular Proteins in Systemic Sclerosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  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

3 authors.

Alsya J AffandiDepartment of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Timothy R D J Radstake
Wioleta Marut

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a complex autoimmune disease in which immune activation, vasculopathy, and extensive fibrosis of the skin and internal organs are among the principal features. SSc is a heterogeneous disease with varying manifestations and clinical outcomes. Currently, patients' clinical evaluation often relies on subjective measures, non-quantitative methods, or requires invasive procedures as markers able to predict disease trajectory or response to therapy are lacking. Therefore, current research is focusing on the discovery of useful biomarkers reflecting ongoing inflammatory or fibrotic activity in the skin and internal organs, as well as being predictive of future disease course. Recently, remarkable progress has been made towards a better understanding of numerous mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of SSc. This has opened new possibilities for the development of novel biomarkers and therapy. However, current proposed biomarkers that could reliably describe various aspects of SSc still require further investigation. This review will summarize studies describing the commonly used and validated biomarkers, the newly emerging and promising SSc biomarkers identified to date, and consideration of future directions in this field.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDisease ProgressionFibrosisHumansPrognosisScleroderma, SystemicSkinBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26168983
PMCPMC4554742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.