ArticleClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2017
Immunophenotyping As a New Tool for Classification and Monitoring of Systemic Autoimmune Diseases.
Article in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- An elevated polyclonal free light chain level reflects a strong interferon signature in patients with systemic autoimmune diseases.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2021Article
- A Patient with Sjogren's Syndrome and Subsequent Diagnosis of Inclusion Body Myositis and Light-Chain Amyloidosis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Autoimmunity in 2017.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical course of systemic autoimmune diseases (SADs) varies greatly, even between individuals with the same disease. Understanding of the immune actors is informative and could lead to significant improvements in diagnosis, monitoring, initial treatment decisions and/or follow-up. However, immunological changes in mononuclear cells associated with SADs have been only partially described, and usually are limited to analysis of peripheral blood cells (less than 5% of the total mononuclear pool). Another limitation is technological, related to utilization of flow cytometry, which remains highly variable with regards to sample preparation, reagents, instrument constraints, and data analysis. As a consequence, and although confirmation conducted by independent teams using multivariate analysis is lacking for proposing to use immunophenotyping in the diagnosis and/or follow-up of patients, there is a consensus of interest for monitoring several mononuclear cell subsets for emerging roles in SADs including memory B cells, effector T cells, and dendritic cells. In the near future and with the development of next generation technologies and standardized operating procedures, it is predicted that flow cytometry will find its place in the development of future personalized medicine in SADs. In addition, better understanding of immunological deregulations (e.g., intracellular phosphoproteins and cytokines, calcium actors) in both human and SAD-prone mouse models, as presented in this special issue, would undoubtedly open new perspectives and applications.
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.