ArticleJournal of translational autoimmunity2022
Autoantibodies in the disease criteria for systemic sclerosis: The need for specification for optimal application.
Article in Journal of translational autoimmunity, 2022. 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.
- Review
- Human-murine chimeric autoantibodies with high affinity and specificity for systemic sclerosis.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Autoantibodies associated with systemic sclerosis in three autoimmune diseases imprinted by type I interferon gene dysregulation: a comparison across SLE, primary Sjögren's syndrome and systemic sclerosis.Lupus science & medicine · 2022Article
- Comprehensive autoantibody profiles in systemic sclerosis: Clinical cluster analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) entail three autoantibodies: anti-centromere antibodies (ACA), anti-topoisomerase I antibodies (ATA), and anti-RNA-polymerase III antibodies (ARA). The importance of ACA and ATA in the classification criteria is evidence based, but the diagnostic value is overestimated by clinicians. Fortunately, these autoantibodies are characterized by good agreement between different immuno-assays. Inclusion of ARA, however, is based on limited evidence and is related to limited agreement between different immuno-assays. Harmonization of immuno-assays in terms of interpretation based on likelihood ratio's may improve future classification criteria for SSc and this needs to be achieved by close collaboration between clinicians, laboratory specialists and the diagnostic industry.
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.