Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31001186›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2019

Biomarkers in Motor Neuron Disease: A State of the Art Review.

Nick S Verber, Stephanie R Shepheard, Matilde Sassani, Harry E McDonough, Sophie A Moore, James J P Alix, Iain D Wilkinson, Tom M Jenkins, Pamela J Shaw

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Chitinases as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Nick S VerberDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Stephanie R ShepheardDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Matilde SassaniDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Harry E McDonoughDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Sophie A MooreDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
James J P AlixDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Iain D WilkinsonDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Tom M JenkinsDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Pamela J ShawDepartment of Neuroscience, Sheffield Institute for Translational Neuroscience (SITraN), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K000039/1Medical Research Council MR/S004920/1Motor Neurone Disease Association TURNER/OCT15/972-797
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motor neuron disease can be viewed as an umbrella term describing a heterogeneous group of conditions, all of which are relentlessly progressive and ultimately fatal. The average life expectancy is 2 years, but with a broad range of months to decades. Biomarker research deepens disease understanding through exploration of pathophysiological mechanisms which, in turn, highlights targets for novel therapies. It also allows differentiation of the disease population into sub-groups, which serves two general purposes: (a) provides clinicians with information to better guide their patients in terms of disease progression, and (b) guides clinical trial design so that an intervention may be shown to be effective if population variation is controlled for. Biomarkers also have the potential to provide monitoring during clinical trials to ensure target engagement. This review highlights biomarkers that have emerged from the fields of systemic measurements including biochemistry (blood, cerebrospinal fluid, and urine analysis); imaging and electrophysiology, and gives examples of how a combinatorial approach may yield the best results. We emphasize the importance of systematic sample collection and analysis, and the need to correlate biomarker findings with detailed phenotype and genotype data.

Indexed as

ALS (Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis)biofluidbiomarkercerebrospinal fluid (CSF)electrophysiologymotor neuron disease (MND)neuroimaging

Identifiers

PMID31001186
PMCPMC6456669

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.