Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29065901›Full record

SynthesisArthritis research & therapy2017

Predictive biological markers of systemic lupus erythematosus flares: a systematic literature review.

Noémie Gensous, Aurélie Marti, Thomas Barnetche, Patrick Blanco, Estibaliz Lazaro, Julien Seneschal, Marie-Elise Truchetet, Pierre Duffau, Christophe Richez, FHU ACRONIM

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Arthritis research & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Noémie GensousImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8428-616X
Aurélie MartiDepartment of Dermatology, Saint-Andre Hospital, Bordeaux, France.
Thomas BarnetcheDepartment of Rheumatology, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France.
Patrick BlancoImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Estibaliz LazaroImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Julien SeneschalDepartment of Dermatology, Saint-Andre Hospital, Bordeaux, France.
Marie-Elise TruchetetImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Pierre DuffauImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Christophe RichezImmunoConcept, UMR CNRS 5164, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. christophe.richez@chu-bordeaux.fr.
FHU ACRONIM
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRHôpital Saint-André · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to identify the most reliable biomarkers in the literature that could be used as flare predictors in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed using two databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) through April 2015 and congress abstracts from the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism were reviewed from 2010 to 2014. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and analysed selected papers in detail, using a specific questionnaire. Reports addressing the relationships between one or more defined biological test(s) and the occurrence of disease exacerbation were included in the systematic review.

resultsFrom all of the databases, 4668 records were retrieved, of which 69 studies or congress abstracts were selected for the systematic review. The performance of seven types of biomarkers performed routinely in clinical practice and nine types of novel biological markers was evaluated. Despite some encouraging results for anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies, anti-C1q antibodies, B-lymphocyte stimulator and tumour necrosis factor-like weak inducer of apoptosis, none of the biomarkers stood out from the others as a potential gold standard for flare prediction. The results were heterogeneous, and a lack of standardized data prevented us from identifying a powerful biomarker.

conclusionsNo powerful conclusions could be drawn from this systematic review due to a lack of standardized data. Efforts should be undertaken to optimize future research on potential SLE biomarkers to develop validated candidates. Thus, we propose a standardized pattern for future studies.

Indexed as

Antibodies, AntinuclearB-Cell Activating FactorBiomarkersComplement C1qC-Reactive ProteinCytokine TWEAKHumansLupus Erythematosus, SystemicPrognosisSensitivity and SpecificityAntibodies, AntinuclearB-Cell Activating FactorBiomarkersComplement C1qC-Reactive ProteinCytokine TWEAKTNFSF12 protein, humanBiomarkerExacerbationFlareSystematic reviewSystemic lupus erythematosus

Identifiers

PMID29065901
PMCPMC5655881
OpenAlexW2765968000

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.