ArticleBiochemia medica2019
Preanalytical classical and alternative complement pathway activity loss.
Article in Biochemia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pitfalls in complement analysis: A systematic literature review of assessing complement activation.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Distinction of early complement classical and lectin pathway activationFrontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Expanding Horizons in Complement Analysis and Quality Control.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionComplement functional analyses provide insight into the integrity of the entire complement reaction cascade. These tests are suitable for investigating suspected complement deficiencies. Falsely reduced test outcomes may result from preanalytical instabilities of individual complement components. To generate rationale for this or potential alternative practices, this study aimed to extend the knowledge on the preanalytical stability of widely used tests to screen the complement system. We assessed the influence of time, temperature and EDTA on classical (CH50) and alternative pathway (AP50) functional assay test results. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe used nephelometric (C3d) and immunofixation (C3c) techniques to support the investigation of the preanalytical phase of basic complement system activity tests. Quantitative determination of classical and alternative pathway function was performed with a haemolytic activity assay and a C5b-9 neo-epitope ELISA-based assay respectively. Blood of five healthy volunteers was sampled and complement components allowed to degrade under different conditions.
resultsCH50 and AP50 remain stable for approximately one week in serum samples incubated on ice. CH50 activity decreased almost twice as fast in EDTA plasma compared to serum at room temperature. AP50 activity contrastingly, decreased twice as slow in EDTA plasma compared to serum at room temperature.
conclusionSerum on ice remains the preferred specimen for functional complement analyses. In the absence of serum transported on ice, serum kept at room temperature (not exceeding 24h) is suitable for classical and alternative pathway analyses. For alternative pathway analyses specifically, the C3-stabilising effect of EDTA allows for the extended use of EDTA plasma (not over 4 days). In these conditions, at least 85% of baseline complement activity remains.
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.