ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2023
Optimal validation of accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases: a narrative review.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advantages of stereolithographic 3D printing in the fabrication of the Affiblot device for dot-blot assays.Mikrochimica acta · 2024Article
- Different bacterial cargo in apoptotic cells drive distinct macrophage phenotypes.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2024Article
- NIR diagnostic imaging of triple-negative breast cancer and its lymph node metastasis for high-efficiency hypoxia-activated multimodal therapy.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: In neuroimmune diseases, autoantibodies are not only used for diagnosis, but also as markers for assessing disease severity and treatment efficacy, and as variables in predicting the prognosis and in subgroup classification. Accuracy of an assay is a prerequisite for using antibodies in the diagnosis and management. The antibody positive subgroup is important in constellating phenotypes, while the antibody negative subgroup provides an opportunity for discovery of new antibodies. This review is to discuss the validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definitions of antibody positive/negative subgroups in neuroimmune diseases. Methods: The literature discussing validation studies of diagnostic accuracy in antibody assays and reasonable definition of antibody positive/negative subgroups in autoimmune diseases was broadly searched and discussed. Key Content and Findings: The designs of a validation study, principles in defining the disease spectrum and biases, interpretation of the testing result and specific considerations for validation studies in neuroimmune diseases (such as phenotypes and inclusion criteria, control group selection, dynamic changes of antibody composition and sampling time, relationship between duration and severity of disease and antibody status, and pre-test factor), and improvement of antibody test techniques, as well as definitions and algorithms in defining antibody positive/negative subgroups in clinical practice and researches, are discussed. Conclusions: The successful implementation of validation studies of autoantibody assays in neuroimmune diseases depends on reasonable design, phenotypic profiles of included patients and potential inclusion bias, test result interpretation and the influence from inclusion criteria, control group selection, patient characteristics on specimen sampling and pre-test factors. Reasonable definitions on antibody positive/negative groups may be different in clinical practice and researches, and rigorous definitions are conducive to constellation of disease phenotype and the exploration of new antibodies within a disease entity.
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.