ArticleGynecologic and obstetric investigation2024
Measurement of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin in Women with Gestational Trophoblastic Disease.
Article in Gynecologic and obstetric investigation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Hyperthyroidism Associated with Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia: Systematic Literature Review and Pathways Analysis.Cancers · 2025Review
- Interference of recombinant human interferon α2b in human chorionic gonadotropin assays: a case report and clinical analysis.AME case reports · 2025Article
- Designing an Electrochemical Biosensor Based on Voltammetry for Measurement of Human Chorionic Gonadotropin.Journal of medical signals and sensors · 2024Article
- Total human chorionic gonadotropin is a more suitable diagnostic marker of gestational trophoblastic diseases than the free β-subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin.Practical laboratory medicine · 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study was to collect information on human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) laboratory testing and reporting in women with gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD), to assess the associated challenges, and to offer perspectives on hCG testing harmonisation.
designInformation was collected from laboratories by electronic survey (SurveyMonkey) using a questionnaire designed by members of the European Organisation for the Treatment of Trophoblastic Disease (EOTTD) hCG working party.
participantsThe questionnaire was distributed by the EOTTD board to member laboratories and their associated scientists who work within the GTD field.
settingThe questionnaire was distributed and accessed via an online platform.
methodsThe questionnaire consisted of 5 main sections. These included methods used for hCG testing, quality procedures, reporting of results, laboratory operational aspects, and non-GTD testing capability. In addition to reporting these survey results, examples of case scenarios which illustrate the difficulties faced by laboratories providing hCG measurement for GTD patient management were described. The benefits and challenges of using centralised versus non-centralised hCG testing were discussed alongside the utilisation of regression curves for management of GTD patients.
resultsInformation from the survey was collated and presented for each section and showed huge variability in responses across laboratories even for those using the same hCG testing platforms. An educational example was presented, highlighting the consequence of using inappropriate hCG assays on clinical patient management (Educational Example A), along with an example of biotin interference (Educational Example B) and an example of high-dose hook effect (Educational Example C), demonstrating the importance of knowing the limitations of hCG tests. The merits of centralised versus non-centralised hCG testing and use of hCG regression curves to aid patient management were discussed. LIMITATIONS: To ensure the survey was completed by laboratories providing hCG testing for GTD management, the questionnaire was distributed by the EOTTD board. It was assumed the EOTTD board held the correct laboratory contact, and that the questionnaire was completed by a scientist with in-depth knowledge of laboratory procedures.
conclusionsThe hCG survey highlighted a lack of harmonisation of hCG testing across laboratories. Healthcare professionals involved in the management of women with GTD should be aware of this limitation. Further work is needed to ensure an appropriate, quality-assured laboratory service is available for hCG monitoring in women with GTD.
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.