ArticlePloS one2021
A rapid calprotectin test for the diagnosis of pleural effusion.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of biochemical ratios in the differential diagnosis of tuberculous and malignant pleural effusions.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of DiaSorin LiaisonAdvances in laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Adenosine deaminase-based measurement in the differential diagnosis of pleural effusion: a multicenter retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In previous studies, measuring the levels of calprotectin in patients with pleural effusion (PE) was an exceptionally accurate way to predict malignancy. Here, we evaluated a rapid method for the measurement of calprotectin levels as a useful parameter in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) in order to minimise invasive diagnostic tests. Calprotectin levels were measured with Quantum Blue® sCAL (QB®sCAL) and compared with the gold standard reference ELISA method. Calprotectin levels in patients with benign pleural effusion (BPE) were significantly higher (p < 0.0001) than for MPE patients. We measured the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) for a cut-off value of ≤ 14,150 ng/mL; the diagnostic accuracy was 64%. The odds ratio for PE calprotectin levels was 10.938 (95% CI [4.133 - 28.947]). The diagnostic performance of calprotectin concentration was better for predicting MPE compared to other individual parameters. Comparison of two assays showed a slope of 1.084, an intercept of 329.7, and a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.798. The Bland-Altman test showed a positive bias for the QB®sCAL method compared to ELISA fCAL®. Clinical concordance between both these methods was 88.5% with a Cohen kappa index of 0.76 (95% CI [0.68 - 0.84]). We concluded that QB®sCAL is a fast, reliable, and non-invasive diagnostic tool for diagnosing MPE and represents an alternative to ELISA that could be implemented in medical emergencies.
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.