ArticleLupus science & medicine2016
Maternal autoantibody profiles at risk for autoimmune congenital heart block: a prospective study in high-risk patients.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ro60-Roles in RNA Processing, Inflammation, and Rheumatic Autoimmune Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Molecular Mechanisms of Fetal and Neonatal Lupus: A Narrative Review of an Autoimmune Disease Transferal across the Placenta.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Autoimmune Congenital Heart Block: A Review of Biomarkers and Management of Pregnancy.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Review
- Autoimmune Calcium Channelopathies and Cardiac Electrical Abnormalities.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Review
- Article
- Progress in the pathogenesis and treatment of cardiac manifestations of neonatal lupus.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2017Review
- Low titer, isolated anti Ro/SSA 60 kd antibodies is correlated with positive pregnancy outcomes in women at risk of congenital heart block.Clinical rheumatology · 2017Article
- In search of an antibody specificity highly predictive of congenital heart block.Lupus science & medicine · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis prospective study aimed to identify antibody profiles characterising mothers with fetuses developing congenital heart block (CHB) by comparing their antibody frequencies and levels with those in unaffected mothers.
methodsEighty-one consecutive pregnant patients positive to anti-Ro±anti-La antibodies, at high risk of developing fetal CHB were prospectively studied. The 16 patients with fetal CHB outcome were considered the study population and the 65 patients with normal pregnancy outcomes were considered the control cohort. Anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, anti-p200 and anti-La antibodies were assayed using home-made ELISA assays.
resultsThe prevalence of anti-p200 antibodies was significantly higher in the fetal CHB affected patients than in the controls (p=0.03). Combinations of anti-p200 with anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies were significantly more frequent in the women with fetuses developing CHB than in the controls (p=0.03 for all combinations). The women with fetal CHB had significantly higher mean anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60 and anti-p200 levels than the controls (p=0.003, p=0.0001 and p=0.04, respectively); mean anti-La/SSB level was not significantly different in the two cohorts (p=0.25).
conclusionsSince anti-p200, anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 antibodies, especially at high level, seem to identify patients at increased risk of developing fetal CHB, their detection could recognise anti-Ro/La positive women at risk for having an infant with this rare, potentially dangerous disorder.
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.