ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Evaluation of a Bi-Analyte Immunoblot as a Useful Tool for Diagnosing Dermatitis Herpetiformis.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for dermatitis herpetiformis: systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Primate liver tissue substrate in indirect immunofluorescence diagnostics for patients with dermatitis herpetiformis and celiac disease.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Dermatitis Herpetiformis: An Update on Diagnosis, Disease Monitoring, and Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immune responses to tissue transglutaminase (tTG) and nonapeptides of gliadin (npG) are associated with dermatitis herpetiformis (DH), a gluten-related dermatosis. Recently, a bi-analyte immunoblot (b-aIB) was introduced to detect IgA antibodies in response to tTG and npG. We compared the utility of ELISA and b-aIB with tTG in serological diagnoses of DH and their agreement with direct immunofluorescence (DIF). In total, 55 sera (27 DIF-positive DH patients, 4 DIF-negative DH patients and 24 healthy controls) were examined. ELISA for anti-tTG IgA, b-aIB for anti-npG and anti-tTG IgA, and statistical analysis were performed. The b-aIB with tTG showed 78% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value, and 82% negative predictive value in relation to ELISA. A better rate of agreement (Cohen's kappa values) in IgA detection was observed in the pair tTG ELISA and b-aIB with npG (0.85) than in pairs tTG ELISA and b-aIB with tTG (0.78) or b-aIB with tTG and b-aIB with npG (0.78). No degree of agreement was found between serological tests and DIF. Both serological tests may be used to detect the anti-tTG IgA in DH patients. Still, DH diagnosing requires careful consideration of clinical data as well as results of tissue imaging (crucial DIF) and immunoserological techniques detecting DH-type features.
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.