ArticleOncotarget2016
CEACAM1 and MICA as novel serum biomarkers in patients with acute and recurrent pericarditis.
Article in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Old and New Biomarkers in Idiopathic Recurrent Acute Pericarditis (IRAP): Prognosis and Outcomes.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Fluorescence Signal Enhancement in Antibody Microarrays Using Lightguiding Nanowires.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Increased Concentrations of Circulating Soluble MHC Class I-Related Chain A (sMICA) and sMICB and Modulation of Plasma Membrane MICA Expression: Potential Mechanisms and Correlation With Natural Killer Cell Activity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- A liquid biopsy for bronchopulmonary/lung carcinoid diagnosis.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- A proteomic analysis identifies candidate early biomarkers to predict ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in polycystic ovarian syndrome patients.Molecular medicine reports · 2017Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe immune response plays a significant role in pericarditis, but the mechanisms of disease are poorly defined. Further, efficient monitoring and predictive clinical tools are unavailable. Carcinoembryonic antigen cell adhesion molecule 1 (CEACAM1) is an immune-inhibitory protein, while MHC class I chain related protein A (MICA) and B (MICB) have an immune-stimulating function. METHODS AND
resultsSerum CEACAM1, MICA and MICB concentrations were measured by ELISA in ~50 subjects of each group: acute pericarditis (AP), recurrent pericarditis (RP) and lupus (SLE) patients, metastatic melanoma patients as well as healthy donors. Serum CEACAM1 was dramatically elevated in AP and RP patients, but not in SLE patients, and displayed a highly accurate profile in ROC curve analyses. MICA and MICB were elevated in some pericarditis patients. All markers were enhanced in metastatic melanoma patients irrespective of neoplastic pericardial involvement. Etiology-guided analysis of RP patients showed that very low MICA levels were associated with idiopathic RP, while high MICA was associated with autoimmune and post-operative RP. Importantly, MICA was significantly associated with recurrences, independently of other potentially confounding parameters such as age, time of follow up or treatment modality.
conclusionsHere we report for the first time on CEACAM1 as a potentially novel biomarker for pericarditis, as well as on MICA as an innovative prognostic marker in these patients. Determination of the roles of these immune factors, as well as their diagnostic and prognostic values should be determined in future prospective studies.
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.