Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28000208›Full record

ReviewClinical and experimental immunology2017

When to initiate immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IGRT) in antibody deficiency: a practical approach.

S Jolles, H Chapel, J Litzman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 143 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Common variable immunodeficiency: autoimmune cytopenias and advances in molecular diagnosis.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

S JollesImmunodeficiency Centre for Wales, Department of Immunology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
H ChapelDepartment of Clinical Immunology, University of Oxford, UK.
J LitzmanDepartment of Clinical Immunology and Allergology, St Annes's University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Masaryk University · CZUniversity Hospital of Wales · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary antibody deficiencies (PAD) constitute the majority of all primary immunodeficiency diseases (PID) and immunoglobulin replacement forms the mainstay of therapy for many patients in this category. Secondary antibody deficiencies (SAD) represent a larger and expanding number of patients resulting from the use of a wide range of immunosuppressive therapies, in particular those targeting B cells, and may also result from renal or gastrointestinal immunoglobulin losses. While there are clear similarities between primary and secondary antibody deficiencies, there are also significant differences. This review describes a practical approach to the clinical, laboratory and radiological assessment of patients with antibody deficiency, focusing on the factors that determine whether or not immunoglobulin replacement should be used. The decision to treat is more straightforward when defined diagnostic criteria for some of the major PADs, such as common variable immunodeficiency disorders (CVID) or X-linked agammaglobulinaemia (XLA), are fulfilled or, indeed, when there is a very low level of immunoglobulin production in association with an increased frequency of severe or recurrent infections in SAD. However, the presentation of many patients is less clear-cut and represents a considerable challenge in terms of the decision whether or not to treat and the best way in which to assess the outcome of therapy. This decision is important, not least to improve individual quality of life and reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with recurrent infections but also to avoid inappropriate exposure to blood products and to ensure that immunoglobulin, a costly and limited resource, is used to maximal benefit.

Indexed as

Common Variable ImmunodeficiencyHumansImmunization, PassiveImmunoglobulins, IntravenousQuality of LifeImmunoglobulins, Intravenousantibody deficiencycommon variable immunodeficiency disorders (CVID)intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg)prophylactic antibioticssecondary antibody deficiency (SAD)subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg)

Identifiers

PMID28000208
PMCPMC5422851
OpenAlexW2562948953

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.