Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28405470›Full record

ArticleRMD open2017

Is vascular endothelial growth factor a useful biomarker in giant cell arteritis?

Nicola Goodfellow, Julien Morlet, Surjeet Singh, Afsie Sabokbar, Andrew Hutchings, Vanshika Sharma, Jana Vaskova, Shauna Masters, Allahdad Zarei, Raashid Luqmani

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in RMD open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00974883 (The Role of Ultrasound Compared to Biopsy of Temporal Arteries in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Giant Cell Arteritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

NCT00974883 completednot on this map

The Role of Ultrasound Compared to Biopsy of Temporal Arteries in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Giant Cell Arteritis (GCA).

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of OxfordRan2010 to 2014Enrolled880ConditionsGiant Cell ArteritisArmsUltrasound of temporal and axillary arteries, Temporal artery biopsy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Mechanism and biomarkers in aortitis--a review.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2020
    Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nicola GoodfellowNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Julien MorletNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Surjeet SinghNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Afsie SabokbarNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Andrew HutchingsLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London , UK.
Vanshika SharmaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Jana VaskovaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Shauna MastersNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
Allahdad ZareiBotnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Raashid LuqmaniNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK.
University of Oxford · GBNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Department of Health 08/64/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the performance of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels as a tool for diagnosing giant cell arteritis (GCA) in a cohort of patients referred for assessment of suspected GCA.

methodsWe selected 298 patients recruited to the multicentre study Temporal Artery Biopsy versus Ultrasound in diagnosis of suspected GCA (TABUL). In a random subset of 26 biopsy-proven GCA cases and 26 controls, serum from weeks 0, 2 and 26 was analysed for VEGF concentration using ELISA. VEGF concentration at week 0 was used to generate a receiver-operating characteristic curve and thereby identify a cut-off for an abnormal result which was used to analyse the full patient cohort. Sections of paraffin-embedded temporal artery were stained by immunohistochemistry for VEGF.

resultsThe mean (95% CI) VEGF concentration at week 0 was 873 pg/mL (631 to 1110) in 26 patients versus 476 pg/mL (328 to 625) in 26 controls (p=0.017). This difference was not observed at any other time point. The optimal cut-off of 713 pg/mL was applied to the whole patient cohort (n=298), yielding sensitivity of 32% and specificity of 85%. This was not improved by combination with any clinical parameters. When patients with biopsy-proven GCA were compared with controls, sensitivity was 58% and specificity remained 85%. Sections of biopsy from biopsy-positive GCA showed intense staining in the adventitia which was not seen in controls.

conclusionsSerum VEGF concentration predicts biopsy positivity but is not useful for differentiating clinical cases of GCA from controls. Further studies into VEGF as a prognostic marker and therapeutic target are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00974883; Post-results.

Indexed as

Giant Cell ArteritisInflammationSystemic vasculitis

Identifiers

PMID28405470
PMCPMC5372063
OpenAlexW2597945615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.