Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33640189›Full record

ArticleAnais brasileiros de dermatologia

Gene panel for the diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa: proposal for a viable and efficient approach.

Luiza Monteavaro Mariath, Ana Elisa Kiszewski, Jeanine Aparecida Frantz, Marina Siebert, Ursula Matte, Lavínia Schuler-Faccini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anais brasileiros de dermatologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of genome diagnostics in epidermolysis bullosa: Unveiling the power of next-generation sequencing.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Observational
  4. Review
  5. Next-generation sequencing in dermatology.Frontiers in medicine · 2023
    Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Luiza Monteavaro MariathGraduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Ana Elisa KiszewskiDermatology Section, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Dermatological Pediatrics Section, Hospital da Criança Santo Antônio, Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Jeanine Aparecida FrantzSchool of Medicine, Universidade Regional de Blumenau, Blumenau, SC, Brazil; DEBRA Brasil, Blumenau, SC, Brazil.
Marina SiebertExperimental Research Center, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Ursula MatteGraduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Experimental Research Center, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Lavínia Schuler-FacciniGraduate Program in Genetics and Molecular Biology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Genética Médica Populacional (INaGeMP), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: lavinia.faccini@ufrgs.br.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRHospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre · BRUniversidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre · BRUniversidade Regional de Blumenau · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidermolysis bullosa is characterized by cutaneous fragility and blistering. Historically, diagnosis is achieved by immunofluorescence mapping or transmission electron microscopy, both involving biopsy procedures. Genetic analysis, especially through next-generation sequencing, is an important tool for the diagnosis of this disease. In Brazil, access to diagnostic methods is limited, and consequently, most patients do not have an accurate diagnosis. Diagnosis allows the indication of prognosis and genetic counselling of the patient.

objectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a gene panel compared to immunofluorescence mapping and transmission electron microscopy by analyzing its benefits, limitations, and economic aspects.

methodsThe gene panel included the 11 main genes associated with epidermolysis bullosa. The techniques were compared, assessing the average cost, advantages, and limitations, through a price survey and literature review.

resultsBoth immunofluorescence mapping and transmission electron microscopy require skin biopsy, are dependent on the investigator's expertise, and are subject to frequent inconclusive results. The gene panel is effective for the conclusive diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa, presents high efficiency and accuracy, is economically feasible, and excludes the need for biopsy. The gene panel allows for prognosis, prenatal genetic diagnosis, and genetic counseling. STUDY LIMITATIONS: It was not possible to find laboratories that perform transmission electron microscopy for epidermolysis bullosa diagnosis in Brazil.

conclusionThis study supports the gene panel as the first-choice method for epidermolysis bullosa diagnosis.

Indexed as

Epidermolysis BullosaBiopsyBlisterBrazilHumansSkinDiagnosisEpidermolysis bullosaGenetic counselingGenetic testing

Identifiers

PMID33640189
PMCPMC8007490
OpenAlexW3128685298

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.