ArticleHeliyon2023
Comparison of two different TSH-receptor antibody assays: A clinical practice study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- TSH Receptor Antibody Test Utilization Patterns From a National Reference Laboratory: TRAb, TSI, or Both?The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Article
- Clinical profiling of TPOAb and TGAb in patients with thyrotrophin receptor antibody-negative thyroid eye disease: A single-center observational study in China.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Observational
- Article
- Clinical performance of a novel and rapid bioassay for detection of thyroid-stimulating immunoglobulins in Graves' orbitopathy patients: a comparison with two commonly used immunoassays.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Comparison between thyroid stimulating immunoglobulin and TSH-receptor antibodies in the diagnosis and management of Graves' disease.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
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
Background: Graves' disease (GD) is caused by the production of TSH-receptor (TSHR) stimulating auto-antibodies. Over the years various TSHR-antibody (TRAb) detection assays have been developed. Most clinical laboratories use competitive TSH-binding inhibitory immunoglobulin (TBII) assays, which measure the total amount of stimulating and blocking auto-antibodies. Selective detection of TSHR stimulating auto-antibodies (TSI) was previously only possible with functional cell-based bioassays. However, more recently an automated bridge-based binding assay to more specifically measure TSI has become available. The aim of our study was to compare the third-generation automated competitive immunoassay (TBII) with the automated bridge immunoassay (TSI) in clinical practice in an academic thyroid expert center. Methods: A retrospective study in 356 patients with Graves' disease, Graves orbitopathy (GO), and other (thyroid) disease treated in an academic thyroid center was performed. All samples were analyzed for TBII and TSI. For both assays, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PVV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic odds ratios were calculated using different cut-offs for negativity. Results: Using the provided cut-off, the overall sensitivity appeared similar between TBII and TSI, but TSI showed higher overall specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic odds ratio. Using two or three times the cut-off for negativity resulted in a decrease in sensitivity, but an increase in specificity and PPV, which was most pronounced for the TBII-assay. Analysis in a subgroup of newly diagnosed treatment naïve GD/GO patients also revealed overall favorable results for the TSI-assay. Increasing the cut-off for negativity resulted in increased specificity for both assays, with similar results using two or three times the cut-off. Most patients with concordant positive results for TBII and TSI suffered from GD or GD + GO (n = 110, 95.6 %), while patients negative for both TBII and TSI mostly suffered from other (thyroid) disease (n = 143, 77.3 %). From patients with positive TBII but negative TSI only 42.1 % had GD/GO (n = 16), whereas 57.9 % (n = 22) had other (thyroid) disease. In contrast, 88.9 % of patients with positive TSI but negative TBII had GD/GO (n = 16), whereas 11.1 % (n = 2) had other (thyroid) disease. Conclusion: In our academic thyroid center, the diagnostic performance of the TSI-assay outperformed the TBII-assay. Using a higher cut-off value for negativity can be helpful in assessing clinical relevance.
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.