ArticlePeerJ2022
Different roles of urinary light chains and serum light chains as potential biomarkers for monitoring disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of Kappa Free Light Chains to Diagnose Multiple Sclerosis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Pooled it
- Heterohybridomas producing human immunoglobulin light chains using CD138-selected bone marrow cells.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic dilemma: Differentiating coexisting systemic lupus erythematosus and Sjögren's syndrome mimicking multiple myeloma in a patient with hypergammaglobulinemia presenting to primary care - A case report.Qatar medical journal · 2025Article
- GSTM2 alleviates heart failure by inhibiting DNA damage in cardiomyocytes.Cell & bioscience · 2023Article
- Serum protein biomarkers for HCC risk prediction in HIV/HBV co-infected people: a clinical proteomic study using mass spectrometry.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The assessment system for monitoring systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease activity is complex and lacks reliable laboratory indicators. It is necessary to find rapid and noninvasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to screen and identify the differentially expressed proteins in urine samples between active SLE and stable SLE and to further explore the expression of light chains. Methods: First, we used a label-free quantitative proteomics approach to establish the urine protein expression profile of SLE, and then screened differentially expressed proteins. Subsequently, the expression of overall light chains was examined by immunofixation electrophoresis and immunoturbidimetric methods, respectively. Results: Mass spectrometry data analysis found a total of 51 light chain peptides in the urinary protein expression spectrum, of which 27 light chain peptides were differentially expressed between the two groups. The largest difference was IGLV5-45 located in the variable region of the immunoglobulin Lambda light chain. The levels of urinary light chains and serum light chains were both significantly elevated in active SLE, and the levels of urinary light chains increased with the severity of disease activity. Conclusions: The measurement of light chains would help to monitor SLE disease activity. Serum light chains had better discriminatory capacity than urinary light chains, while urine light chains were closely related to the severity of disease activity and could be used for dynamically monitoring the progress of disease activity.
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.