Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36071498›Full record

ArticleAdvances in rheumatology (London, England)2022

VI Brazilian consensus guidelines for detection of anti-cell autoantibodies on HEp-2 cells.

Wilson de Melo Cruvinel, Luis Eduardo Coelho Andrade, Alessandra Dellavance, Antônio Carlos Ximenes, Carlos David Araújo Bichara, Cristóvão Luis Pitangueira Mangueira, Eloísa Bonfá, Fabiano de Almeida Brito, Henrique Ataíde Mariz, Lisiane Maria Enriconi Dos Anjos and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in rheumatology (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

16 authors.

Wilson de Melo CruvinelSchool of Medical and Life Sciences, Escola de Ciências Médicas e da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás (PUC GOIÁS), Avenida Universitária 1.440, Setor Universitário, Goiânia, GO, 74605-010, Brazil. melocruvinel@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-3903-0499
Luis Eduardo Coelho AndradeRheumatology Division, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, Brazil.
Alessandra DellavanceImmunology Division, Fleury Medicine and Health Laboratories, São Paulo, Brazil.
Antônio Carlos XimenesHospital Geral de Goiânia Alberto Rassi, Goiânia, GO, Brazil.
Carlos David Araújo BicharaCentro Universitário Metropolitano da Amazônia (UNIFAMAZ), Amaral Costa Medicina Diagnóstica, Belém, PA, Brazil.
Cristóvão Luis Pitangueira MangueiraDepartamento de Patologia Clínica e Anatomia Patológica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Eloísa BonfáFaculdade de Medicina, Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Fabiano de Almeida BritoDepartment of Clinical Pathology, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Henrique Ataíde MarizRheumatology Department, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, PE, Brazil.
Lisiane Maria Enriconi Dos AnjosUniversidade do Sul de Santa Catarina (UNISUL) e Universidade do Vale do Itajaí (UNIVALI), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
Sandra Gofinet PasotoServiço de Reumatologia e Laboratório de Autoimunidade da Divisão de Laboratório Central do Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Valeria ValimUniversidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES), Vitória, ES, Brazil.
Wilton Ferreira Silva Dos SantosEscola Superior de Ciências da Saúde do Distrito Federal (ESCS) e Laboratório Sabin, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Clayson Moura GomesSchool of Medical and Life Sciences, Escola de Ciências Médicas e da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás (PUC GOIÁS), Avenida Universitária 1.440, Setor Universitário, Goiânia, GO, 74605-010, Brazil.
Roberpaulo Anacleto NevesSchool of Medical and Life Sciences, Escola de Ciências Médicas e da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás (PUC GOIÁS), Avenida Universitária 1.440, Setor Universitário, Goiânia, GO, 74605-010, Brazil.
Paulo Luiz Carvalho FrancescantonioSchool of Medical and Life Sciences, Escola de Ciências Médicas e da Vida, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás (PUC GOIÁS), Avenida Universitária 1.440, Setor Universitário, Goiânia, GO, 74605-010, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe VI Brazilian Consensus on Autoantibodies against HEp-2 cells for determination of autoantibodies against cellular constituents on HEp-2 cells was held on September, 2019, in Fortaleza (CE, Brazil). The guidelines in this edition were formulated by the group of Brazilian experts discussing the classification of complex patterns, the classification of the nuclear discrete dots (few and multiple), the identification of the discrete fine speckled pattern (AC-4a) and improvements on the ANA report. MAINBODY: Sixteen Brazilian researchers and experts from universities and clinical laboratories representing the various geographical regions of Brazil participated in the meeting. Four main topics were discussed: (1) How to classify patterns with fluorescence in more than one cell compartment considering three relevant categoris: composite patterns, mixed patterns and multiple patterns; (2) The splitting of the discrete nuclear dots pattern into the multiple discrete nuclear dots (AC-6) and few discrete nuclear dots (AC-7) patterns, respectively; (3) Inclusion of a novel nuclear pattern characterized by discrete fine speckled pattern highly associated with antibodies to SS-A/Ro60, classified as AC-4a. In addition, adjustments on the Brazilian Consensus nomenclature were implemented aiming to harmonize the designation of some patterns with the International Consensus on ANA Patterns (ICAP). Furthermore, the designations of the PCNA-like pattern (AC-13), CENP-F-like pattern (AC-14) and Topo I-like pattern (AC-29) were adjusted in accordance to ICAP. Finally, there was a recommendation for adjustment in the test report in order to address the status of nuclear envelope staining. For all topics, the aim was to establish specific guidelines for laboratories and clinicians. All recommendations were based on consensus among participants. All recommendations from the V Consensus were maintained and there was relevant progress in the BCA/HEp-2 guidelines and further harmonization with ICAP.

conclusionThe VI BCA/HEp-2 edition was successful in establishing important recommendations regarding the classification of complex patterns, in supporting the identification of a novel pattern within the AC-4 group and in the harmonization process with the ICAP terminology.

Indexed as

Antibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodiesBrazilConsensusHumansAntibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodies

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.