ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2020
Trends in Diagnosis of Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency Between 2015 and 2019 in a Reference Laboratory.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hospital Admission Trends in Alpha-1-Antitrypsin Deficiency: A Sex-Based Analysis from the Spanish National Discharge Database, 2016-2022.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- New variants of alpha-1-antitrypsin: structural simulations and clinical expression.Respiratory research · 2022Article
- Registry-based cohort study of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency prevalence, incidence and mortality in Denmark 2000-2018.BMJ open respiratory research · 2022Article
- Methodologies for the Determination of Blood Alpha1 Antitrypsin Levels: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Decalogue of Best Practices in Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency.Open respiratory archivesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) remains largely underdiagnosed despite recommendations of healthcare institutions and programmes designed to increase awareness. The objective was to analyse the trends in AATD diagnosis during the last 5 years in a Spanish AATD reference laboratory. Methods: This was a retrospective revision of all alpha-1 antitrypsin (AAT) determinations undertaken in our laboratory from 2015 to 2019. We analysed the number of AAT determinations performed and described the characteristics of the individuals tested, as well as the medical specialties and the reasons for requesting AAT determination. Results: A total of 3507 determinations were performed, of which 5.5% corresponded to children. A significant increase in the number of AAT determinations was observed from 349 in 2015 to 872 in 2019. Among the samples, 57.6% carried an intermediate AATD (50-119 mg/dL) and 2.4% severe deficiency (<50 mg/dL). The most frequent phenotype in severe AATD individuals was PI*ZZ (78.5%), and aminotransferase levels were above normal in around 43% of children and 30% of adults. Respiratory specialists requested the highest number of AAT determinations (31.5%) followed by digestive diseases and internal medicine (27.5%) and primary care physicians (19.7%). The main reason for AAT determination in severe AATD adults was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (41.7%), but reasons for requesting AAT determination were not reported in up to 41.7% of adults and 58.3% of children. Conclusion: There is an increase in the frequency of AATD testing despite the rate of AAT determination remaining low. Awareness about AAT is probably increasing, but the reason for testing is not always clear.
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.