Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29928272›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2018

Comparison of Serological Biomarkers in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Their Combination to Improve Diagnostic Performance.

Laura Martinez-Prat, Michael J Nissen, Céline Lamacchia, Chelsea Bentow, Laura Cesana, Pascale Roux-Lombard, Cem Gabay, Michael Mahler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Laura Martinez-PratResearch and Development, Inova Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, CA, United States.
Michael J NissenDivision of Rheumatology, Geneva University Hospitals (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland.
Céline LamacchiaDivision of Rheumatology, Geneva University Hospitals (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland.
Chelsea BentowResearch and Development, Inova Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, CA, United States.
Laura CesanaResearch and Development, Inova Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, CA, United States.
Pascale Roux-LombardDivision of Immunology and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine Specialties, Geneva University Hospital (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland.
Cem GabayDivision of Rheumatology, Geneva University Hospitals (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland.
Michael MahlerResearch and Development, Inova Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, CA, United States.
Nova Medical (United States) · USIRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano · ITUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is based on a combined approach that includes serological markers such as rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated peptide/protein antibodies (ACPA). The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of several RF and ACPA immunoassays for the diagnosis of RA, as well as the diagnostic value of a combinatory approach with these markers. Methods: The study cohort included 1,655 patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management registry with sera from 968 patients with RA and 687 disease controls, including patients with axial spondyloarthritis ( Results: All three ACPA assays showed good discrimination between RA patients and controls and good clinical performance. Overall, CCP3 performed better than CCP2. More pronounced differences were observed between the RF assays. We observed that CIA platforms for both RF IgM and RF IgA showed better performance than the ELISA platforms. Excellent and good total agreements were found between ELISA and CIA for CCP3 (total agreement 95.3%, kappa = 0.90), and between CCP2 and CCP3 ELISA (total agreement 86.6%, kappa = 0.73), respectively. RF IgM CIA and ELISA had a good qualitative agreement (86.5%, kappa = 0.73); RF IgA CIA and ELISA showed a moderate total agreement (78.5%, kappa = 0.53). When combinatory analyses were performed, the likelihood of RA increased with dual positivity and triple positivity and combining different markers resulted in higher odds ratio than the individual markers in all cases. Conclusion: ACPA and RF showed good clinical performance in this large Swiss cohort of RA patients and controls. Overall, the performance of CCP3 was superior to CCP2. The combination of these biomarkers in an interval model represents a potential tool for the diagnosis of RA patients.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultArthritis, RheumatoidBiomarkersEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleHumansImmunoassayLiquid BiopsyMaleRegistriesReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySwitzerlandYoung AdultBiomarkersanti-citrullinated peptide/protein antibodiesCCP2CCP3diagnosisRARFrheumatoid arthritisrheumatoid factor

Identifiers

PMID29928272
PMCPMC5997814
OpenAlexW2799983998

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.