ReviewPloS one2022
Diagnostic test accuracy of novel biomarkers for lupus nephritis-An overview of systematic reviews.
Review in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) in rheumatic diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Periostin and rheumatic diseases: early insights from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The diagnostic role of the systemic inflammation index in patients with immunological diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The role of bilirubin as a biomarker of rheumatic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Pooled it
- Construction and validation of a glycosylation-related diagnostic model and immune characterization in lupus nephritis.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of clinical, histological and biomarker response after initial therapy of lupus nephritis.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Integrative bioinformatics and experimental analysis reveals FRA1 as a key mediator of tubulointerstitial inflammation in lupus nephritis.Molecular medicine reports · 2026Article
- Establishment of a Time-Resolved Fluoroimmunoassay for sC5b-9 and Validation in Lupus Nephritis.Journal of fluorescence · 2026Article
- Biomarkers in Lupus Nephritis: An Evidence-Based Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Kidney transplantation in Lupus Nephritis: a comprehensive review of challenges and strategies.BMC surgery · 2025Review
- Association of autoantibodies with the IFN signature and NETosis in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2024Article
- Renal remodeling by CXCL10-CXCR3 axis-recruited mesenchymal stem cells and subsequent IL4I1 secretion in lupus nephritis.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Non-Invasive Biomarkers for Diagnosis, Risk Prediction, and Therapy Guidance of Glomerular Kidney Diseases: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Classifying systemic lupus erythematosus using laboratory items alone: a preliminary study.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- Lupus Nephritis Biomarkers: A Critical Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Circulatory microRNAs and proinflammatory cytokines as predictors of lupus nephritis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Investigating the value of urinary biomarkers in relation to lupus nephritis histopathology: present insights and future prospects.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- Lupus Nephritis in Children: Novel Perspectives.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Lupus Nephritis Risk Factors and Biomarkers: An Update.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease with multiorgan inflammatory involvement and a mortality rate that is 2.6-fold higher than individuals of the same age and sex in the general population. Approximately 50% of patients with SLE develop renal impairment (lupus nephritis). Delayed diagnosis of lupus nephritis is associated with a higher risk of progression to end-stage renal disease, the need for replacement therapy, and mortality. The initial clinical manifestations of lupus nephritis are often discrete or absent and are usually detected through complementary tests. Although widely used in clinical practice, their accuracy is limited. A great scientific effort has been exerted towards searching for new, more sensitive, and specific biomarkers in recent years. Some systematic reviews have individually evaluated new serum and urinary biomarkers tested in patients with lupus nephritis. This overview aimed to summarize systematic reviews on the accuracy of novel serum and urinary biomarkers for diagnosing lupus nephritis in patients with SLE, discussing how our results can guide the clinical management of the disease and the direction of research in this area.
methodsThe research question is "What is the accuracy of the new serum and urinary biomarkers studied for the diagnosis of LN in patients with SLE?". We searched for systematic reviews of observational studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of new serum or urinary biomarkers of lupus nephritis. The following databases were included: PubMed, EMBASE, BIREME/LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane, including gray literature found via Google Scholar and PROQUEST. Two authors assessed the reviews for inclusion, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias (ROBIS tool).
resultsTen SRs on the diagnostic accuracy of new serum and urinary BMs in LN were selected. The SRs evaluated 7 distinct BMs: (a) antibodies (anti-Sm, anti-RNP, and anti-C1q), (b) cytokines (TWEAK and MCP-1), (c) a chemokine (IP-10), and (d) an acute phase glycoprotein (NGAL), in a total of 20 review arms (9 that analyzed serum BMs, and 12 that analyzed BMs in urine). The population evaluated in the primary studies was predominantly adults. Two SRs included strictly adults, 5 reviews also included studies in the paediatric population, and 4 did not report the age groups. The results of the evaluation with the ROBIS tool showed that most of the reviews had a low overall risk of bias.
conclusionsThere are 10 SRs of evidence relating to the diagnostic accuracy of serum and urinary biomarkers for lupus nephritis. Among the BMs evaluated, anti-C1q, urinary MCP-1, TWEAK, and NGAL stood out, highlighting the need for additional research, especially on LN diagnostic panels, and attempting to address methodological issues within diagnostic accuracy research. This would allow for a better understanding of their usefulness and possibly validate their clinical use in the future. REGISTRATION: This project is registered on the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42020196693).
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.