ArticleBMC infectious diseases2018
The performance of rapid plasma reagin (RPR) titer in HIV-negative general paresis after neurosyphilis therapy.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment of HIV-negative neurosyphilis risk score model based on logistic regression.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Clinical and Laboratory Characteristics, Neuroimaging Alternations and Treatment Response of 25 HIV-Negative General Paresis Patients.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Neurosyphilis: insights into its pathogenesis, susceptibility, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Predicting asymptomatic neurosyphilis using peripheral blood indicators.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Combination of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and serum toluidine red unheated serum test titer as a predictor of neurosyphilis in HIV-negative patients.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
- Clinical Manifestations, Fluid Changes and Neuroimaging Alterations in Patients with General Paresis of the Insane.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRepeated nontreponemal serologic test for syphilis titers is recommended to evaluate treatment response. However, it is unknown whether serum rapid plasma reagin (RPR) titer can serve as a surrogate for determining the efficacy of treatment in general paresis (GP) remains unknown.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed data from 105 GP patients, who were divided into two groups (62 CSF RPR+ patients and 43 CSF RPR- patients) according to reactive RPR test status in CSF. Clinical assessment included the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, CSF examinations (WBC count, protein concentration and RPR titer), and serum tests (RPR titer and TPPA). Among the 105 GP patients, 13 CSF RPR+ patients and 6 CSF RPR- patients had a 12 months follow-up of CSF, serum measures and MMSE.
resultsThe median serum RPR titer was significantly higher in CSF RPR+ patients than that in CSF RPR- GP patients, 1:8 [IQR 1:4-1:32] vs. 1:4 [IQR 1:4-1:8] (P < 0.001). The number of CSF RPR+ patients with serum RPR titer≥1:32 was significantly higher when compared with CSF RPR- patients (P = 0.001). For CSF RPR+ patients, the MMSE scores improved or remained constantly after penicillin treatment. For CSF RPR+ patients, the CSF RPR titer declined four-fold in 85% (11/13) of the patients, whereas the serum RPR titer declined four-fold in only 46% (6/13) of the patients, the odds ratio is 6.4 (95% confidence interval 1.0-41.2).
conclusionsA four-fold decline in CSF RPR titer is a good predictor for treatment efficacy in CSF RPR+ GP patients within 12 months after the completion of therapy.
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.