Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34899726›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2021

Comparison of Two Diagnostic Assays for Anti-Laminin 332 Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid.

Stephanie Goletz, Federica Giurdanella, Maike M Holtsche, Miranda Nijenhuis, Barbara Horvath, Gilles F H Diercks, Detlef Zillikens, Takashi Hashimoto, Enno Schmidt, Hendri H Pas

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Autoimmunity against laminin 332.Frontiers in immunology · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Stephanie GoletzLübeck Institute for Experimental Dermatology (LIED), University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Federica GiurdanellaCenter for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Maike M HoltscheDepartment of Dermatology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Miranda NijenhuisCenter for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Barbara HorvathCenter for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Gilles F H DiercksCenter for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Detlef ZillikensDepartment of Dermatology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Takashi HashimotoDepartment of Dermatology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan.
Enno SchmidtLübeck Institute for Experimental Dermatology (LIED), University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Hendri H PasCenter for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
University of Groningen · NLUniversity of Lübeck · DEKurume University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anti-laminin 332 mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is an autoimmune blistering disease characterized by predominant mucosal lesions and autoantibodies against laminin 332. The exact diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP is important since nearly 30% of patients develop solid cancers. This study compared two independently developed diagnostic indirect immunofluorescence (IF) tests based on recombinant laminin 332 expressed in HEK239 cells (biochip mosaic assay) and the migration trails of cultured keratinocytes rich in laminin 332 (footprint assay). The sera of 54 anti-laminin 332 MMP, 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP, and 30 pemphigus vulgaris patients as well as 20 healthy blood donors were analyzed blindly and independently. Fifty-two of 54 and 54/54 anti-laminin 332 MMP sera were positive in the biochip mosaic and the footprint assay, respectively. In the 35 non-anti-laminin 332 MMP sera, 3 were positive in both tests and 4 others showed weak reactivity in the footprint assay. In conclusion, both assays are easy to perform, highly sensitive, and specific, which will further facilitate the diagnosis of anti-laminin 332 MMP.

Indexed as

Biological AssayAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAutoantibodiesAutoantigensBiomarkersCase-Control StudiesCell Adhesion MoleculesFemaleFluorescent Antibody Technique, IndirectGermanyHEK293 CellsHumansJapanKalininAutoantibodiesAutoantigensBiomarkersCell Adhesion MoleculesKalininautoantibodybiochipblisteringcancerfootprintlaminin 332malignancymucous membrane pemphigoid

Identifiers

PMID34899726
PMCPMC8657402
OpenAlexW3216715034

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.