ArticleClinical rheumatology2022
BVAS version 3 and BVAS/GPA: standing on the same line?
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating GDF15 May Estimate Vasculitis Activity and Predict Poor Outcomes During the Disease Course of ANCA-Associated Vasculitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
objectivesBirmingham vasculitis activity score (BVAS) version 3 (BVAS 3.0) and BVAS/granulomatosis with polyangiitis (BVAS/GPA) are used as indicators of disease activity in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis. We evaluated the association between these indices and the significance in patients with GPA and microscopic polyangiitis (GPA/MPA).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 203 patients with GPA/MPA in our hospital. The correlation between BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA with the five-factor score (FFS) and laboratory data was investigated. The episodes of all-cause mortality, end-stage renal disease, and disease relapse were counted as adverse clinical outcomes. Multivariate Cox hazard analyses were performed to assess the relationships between both indices and patient outcomes.
resultsSixty-five (32.0%) and 138 (68.0%) patients with GPA and MPA were included. The median BVAS 3.0 was significantly higher in patients with MPA than in those with GPA (13.0 vs. 11.0, p = 0.015), whereas BVAS/GPA was higher in patients with GPA (4.0 vs. 3.0, p = 0.001). BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA correlated significantly (r = 0.670, p < 0.001); both BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA were shown to be associated with the outcomes investigated in separate Cox models. However, the correlation between BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA was especially higher in a subgroup of patients with MPA than in those with GPA (MPA: r = 0.817, p < 0.001 vs. GPA: r = 0.570, p < 0.001) and with renal involvement (r = 0.676, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAlthough both BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA significantly correlated and predicted outcomes well in those with GPA/MPA, a discord was observed based on disease subtypes and organ involvement. Key Points • BVAS 3.0 and BVAS/GPA significantly correlated and predicted outcomes in those with GPA/MPA. • A discordance was also observed based on disease subtypes and organ involvement.
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.