Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28337112›Full record

ReviewEXCLI journal2016

The past and present of serum aminotransferases and the future of liver injury biomarkers.

Mitchell R McGill

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in EXCLI journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 264 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
264citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
20.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

264 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 480 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Dietary taurine supplementation enhances growth performance of Japanese seabass (Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

204 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

1 author.

Mitchell R McGillDiv. of Laboratory and Genomic Medicine, Dept. of Pathology and Immunology; Dept. of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratory testing is important in the diagnosis and monitoring of liver injury and disease. Current liver tests include plasma markers of injury (e.g. aminotransferases, γ-glutamyl transferase, and alkaline phosphatase), markers of function (e.g. prothrombin time, bilirubin), viral hepatitis serologies, and markers of proliferation (e.g. α-fetoprotein). Among the injury markers, the alanine and aspartate aminotransferases (ALT and AST, respectively) are the most commonly used. However, interpretation of ALT and AST plasma levels can be complicated. Furthermore, both have poor prognostic utility in acute liver injury and liver failure. New biomarkers of liver injury are rapidly being developed, and the US Food and Drug Administration the European Medicines Agency have recently expressed support for use of some of these biomarkers in drug trials. The purpose of this paper is to review the history of liver biomarkers, to summarize mechanisms and interpretation of ALT and AST elevation in plasma in liver injury (particularly acute liver injury), and to discuss emerging liver injury biomarkers that may complement or even replace ALT and AST in the future.

Indexed as

biomarkersdiagnosticsliver diseaseliver injurymechanistic biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID28337112
PMCPMC5318690
OpenAlexW2598681194

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.