Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33566823›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Eosinophil-derived neurotoxin: A biologically and analytically attractive asthma biomarker.

Bert Rutten, Simon Young, Magdalena Rhedin, Marita Olsson, Nisha Kurian, Farhat Syed, Augusta Beech, Mark Fidock, Paul Newbold, Dave Singh and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. From FEVJournal of asthma and allergy · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Eosinophil-Derived Neurotoxin Determinants and Reference Values in a Swedish Middle-Aged General Population.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Bert RuttenPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Simon YoungPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Magdalena RhedinCOPD/IPF Bioscience, Research and Early Development, Respiratory & Immunology, Biopharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Marita OlssonEarly Respiratory & Immunology Statistics, Biopharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Nisha KurianPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Farhat SyedPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Augusta BeechMedicines Evaluation Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Hospital Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Mark FidockPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Paul NewboldLate Stage Respiratory and Immunology, Biopharmaceutical R&D, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, Maryland, United States of America.
Dave SinghMedicines Evaluation Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester University NHS Foundation Hospital Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Adam PlattTranslational Science and Experimental Medicine, Research and Early Development, Respiratory & Immunology, Biopharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Glen HughesPrecision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5185-643X
AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) · GBAstraZeneca (Sweden) · SEUniversity of Manchester · GBAstraZeneca (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a growing body of evidence for the utility of eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN) as a biomarker in asthma, including association with eosinophilic airway inflammation, assessment of disease severity and potential for predicting pathogenic risks, including exacerbations. However, to interpret any biomarker data with confidence, it is first important to understand the preanalytical factors and biological variation that may affect its reliable measurement and results interpretation. In this study we defined the healthy serum EDN reference range for men and women as 1.98 to 26.10 ng/mL, with no significant gender differences. Smoking did not impact the mean EDN levels and no circadian rhythm was identified for EDN, unlike blood eosinophils (EOS) where levels peaked at 00:00h. EDN expression in different cell types was investigated and shown to occur primarily in eosinophils, indicating they are likely to be the main cellular repository for EDN. We also confirm that the quantification of serum EDN is not influenced by the type of storage tube used, and it is stable at ambient temperature or when refrigerated for at least 7 days and for up to one year when frozen at -20°C or -80°C. In summary, EDN is a stable biomarker that may prove useful in precision medicine approaches by enabling the identification of a subpopulation of asthma patients with activated eosinophils and a more severe form of the disease.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsthmaBiomarkersEosinophil-Derived NeurotoxinEosinophilsFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedReference ValuesSeverity of Illness IndexBiomarkersEosinophil-Derived Neurotoxin

Identifiers

PMID33566823
PMCPMC7875349
OpenAlexW3128131656

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.