Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2018
Sputum signatures for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with underlying respiratory diseases (SPARED): study protocol for a prospective diagnostic trial.
Trial report 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.
- Article
- Genetic diversity and antifungal susceptibility among ecological niche populations of Aspergillus flavus in Yaoundé, Cameroon.PloS one · 2026Article
- Genome-scale metabolic modeling of Aspergillus fumigatus strains reveals growth dependencies on the lung microbiome.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Application of Precise Positioning for Sputum Expectoration in ICU Patients with Pulmonary Infection.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Invasive aspergillosis in critically ill patients: Review of definitions and diagnostic approaches.Mycoses · 2021Review
- Aspergillus fumigatus and Aspergillosis in 2019.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInvasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) has been increasingly reported in patients with underlying respiratory diseases (URD). Early diagnosis of IPA is crucial for mortality reduction and improved prognosis, yet remains difficult. Existing diagnostic tools for IPA largely rely on the detection of biomarkers based on serum or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), both of which have their limitations. The use of sputum sample is non-invasive, and Aspergillus detection is feasible; however, the usefulness of sputum biomarkers for the diagnosis of IPA, especially in patients with URD, has not been systematically studied.
methodsThis is a prospective diagnostic trial. At least 118 participants will be recruited from respiratory wards and intensive care units. IPA is defined according to the EORTC/MSG criteria modified for patients with URD. Induced sputum and blood will be collected, and BALF will be obtained by bronchoscopy. Sputum biomarkers, including galactomannan, Aspergillus DNA, triacetylfusarinine and bis(methylthio)gliotoxin will be determined, and the presence of a JF5 antigen will be examined with a lateral fluid device. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and diagnostic odds ratio will be computed for different biomarkers and compared using the McNemar χ DISCUSSION: We have developed and verified the feasibility of Aspergillus-related biomarker assays for sputum. The study findings will contribute to a novel look at the diagnostic performance of sputum biomarkers in IPA and provide important insight into the improvement of the early diagnosis of IPA, particularly in patients with URD.
trial registrationThis study has been registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( ChiCTR-DPD-16009070 ) on 24th of August 2016.
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.