ArticleMycoses2021
Diagnosis of allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis in patients with persistent allergic asthma using three different diagnostic algorithms.
Article in Mycoses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proposal and Verification of New Revised Criteria for ABPA/ABPM Diagnosis.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2025Article
- Meta-analysis of the adoption of omalizumab in the treatment of pediatric allergic diseases.Heliyon · 2024Article
- The immune response to airway mycosis.Current opinion in microbiology · 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
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAllergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) has been reported in various degrees among patients with persistent allergic asthma (PAA). Currently, there is no gold standard approach for diagnosis of ABPA.
objectivesIn the current study, we aimed the evaluation of three different mainly used algorithms as Rosenberg & Patterson (A), ISHAM Working Group (B) and Greenberger (C) for diagnosis of ABPA in 200 patients with underlying PAA.
methodsAll patients were evaluated using Aspergillus skin prick test (SPTAf), Aspergillus-specific IgE (sIgEAf) and IgG (sIgGAf), total IgE (tIgE), pulmonary function tests, radiological findings and peripheral blood eosinophil count. The prevalence rate of ABPA in PAA patients was estimated by three diagnostic criteria. We used Latent Class Analysis for the evaluation of different diagnostic parameters in different applied ABPA diagnostic algorithms.
resultsAspergillus sensitisation was observed in 30 (15.0%) patients. According to algorithms A, B and C, nine (4.5%), six (3.0%) and 11 (5.5%) of patients were diagnosed with ABPA, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of criteria B and C were (55.6% and 99.5%) and (100.0% and 98.9%) respectively. sIgEAf and sIgGAf showed the high significant sensitivity. The performance of algorithm A, in terms of sensitivity and specificity, was somewhat better than algorithm B.
conclusionOur study demonstrated that the sensitivity of different diagnostic algorithms could change the prevalence rate of ABPA. We also found that all of three criteria resulted an adequate specificity for ABPA diagnosis. A consensus patterns combining elements of all three criteria may warrant a better diagnostic algorithm.
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.