Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27846293›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Assessment of Intrathecal Free Light Chain Synthesis: Comparison of Different Quantitative Methods with the Detection of Oligoclonal Free Light Chains by Isoelectric Focusing and Affinity-Mediated Immunoblotting.

David Zeman, Pavlína Kušnierová, Zdeněk Švagera, František Všianský, Monika Byrtusová, Pavel Hradílek, Barbora Kurková, Olga Zapletalová, Vladimír Bartoš

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

David ZemanInstitute of Laboratory Diagnostics, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6822-2572
Pavlína KušnierováInstitute of Laboratory Diagnostics, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
Zdeněk ŠvageraInstitute of Laboratory Diagnostics, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
František VšianskýInstitute of Laboratory Diagnostics, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
Monika ByrtusováInstitute for Healthcare Disciplines, St. Elisabeth University of Health and Social Work in Bratislava, Palackého 1, P.O. Box 104, 810 00 Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
Pavel HradílekClinic of Neurology, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
Barbora KurkováClinic of Neurology, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
Olga ZapletalováClinic of Neurology, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
Vladimír BartošInstitute of Laboratory Diagnostics, University Hospital Ostrava, 17. listopadu 1790, 708 52 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic.
University Hospital Ostrava · CZVysoká Škola Zdravotníctva a Sociálnej Práce sv. Alžbety · SK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to compare various methods for free light chain (fLC) quantitation in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum and to determine whether quantitative CSF measurements could reliably predict intrathecal fLC synthesis. In addition, we wished to determine the relationship between free kappa and free lambda light chain concentrations in CSF and serum in various disease groups.

methodsWe analysed 166 paired CSF and serum samples by at least one of the following methods: turbidimetry (Freelite™, SPAPLUS), nephelometry (N Latex FLC™, BN ProSpec), and two different (commercially available and in-house developed) sandwich ELISAs. The results were compared with oligoclonal fLC detected by affinity-mediated immunoblotting after isoelectric focusing.

resultsAlthough the correlations between quantitative methods were good, both proportional and systematic differences were discerned. However, no major differences were observed in the prediction of positive oligoclonal fLC test. Surprisingly, CSF free kappa/free lambda light chain ratios were lower than those in serum in about 75% of samples with negative oligoclonal fLC test. In about a half of patients with multiple sclerosis and clinically isolated syndrome, profoundly increased free kappa/free lambda light chain ratios were found in the CSF.

conclusionsOur results show that using appropriate method-specific cut-offs, different methods of CSF fLC quantitation can be used for the prediction of intrathecal fLC synthesis. The reason for unexpectedly low free kappa/free lambda light chain ratios in normal CSFs remains to be elucidated. Whereas CSF free kappa light chain concentration is increased in most patients with multiple sclerosis and clinically isolated syndrome, CSF free lambda light chain values show large interindividual variability in these patients and should be investigated further for possible immunopathological and prognostic significance.

Indexed as

Case-Control StudiesDemyelinating DiseasesEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansImmunoblottingImmunoglobulin kappa-ChainsImmunoglobulin lambda-ChainsIsoelectric FocusingMultiple SclerosisNephelometry and TurbidimetryObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsROC CurveImmunoglobulin kappa-ChainsImmunoglobulin lambda-Chains

Identifiers

PMID27846293
PMCPMC5112955
OpenAlexW2553802638

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.