ReviewLupus science & medicine2020
Finding lupus in the ANA haystack.
Review in Lupus science & medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Case Report in Using a Laboratory-Based Decision Support Alert for Research Enrollment and Randomization.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- A presentation of systemic lupus erythematosus manifesting as abdominal pain: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Novel biomarker discovery through comprehensive proteomic analysis of lupus mouse serum.Journal of autoimmunity · 2024Article
- Identifying antinuclear antibody positive individuals at risk for developing systemic autoimmune disease: development and validation of a real-time risk model.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Phenotype Risk Score but Not Genetic Risk Score Aids in Identifying Individuals With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in the Electronic Health Record.Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Autoantibody Discovery, Assay Development and Adoption: Death Valley, the Sea of Survival and Beyond.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
- Emerging Molecular Markers Towards Potential Diagnostic Panels for Lupus.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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosis of SLE in early stages is challenging due to the heterogeneous nature of presenting symptoms and the poor performance metrics of the screening ANA test. Even the more specific double-stranded DNA autoantibody has relatively low predictive value in early disease. A consequence is delayed referral, with the likelihood that some patients have progression of disease prior to specialist evaluation. Tests that might fill this diagnostic gap are therefore needed. The AVISE Connective Tissue Disease Test that uses a multiplex approach to detect autoantibodies and cell-bound complement products has shown utility in distinguishing SLE from other rheumatological conditions. Whether it might be useful in early disease stages to predict progression is addressed in a recent study by Liang and colleagues, who tested clinic patients who had non-specific findings with the objective of determining whether AVISE could predict onset of SLE. While this test provided more useful prognostic information than other available diagnostics, it had relatively low sensitivity, suggesting that significant numbers of patients with preclinical SLE would be missed by this screening. The need remains for development of diagnostics with robust sensitivity and specificity in early disease that would also deliver prognostic information about risk for SLE. Such tests would have great value as a tool for primary providers to more efficiently triage ANA-positive patients for appropriate specialty evaluation.
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.