Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38141119›Full record

ReviewNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Neurofilament light chain as a biomarker in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder: a comprehensive review and integrated analysis with glial fibrillary acidic protein.

Sohyeon Kim, Jae-Joon Lee, Jin-Sung Park, Minsung Kang, Hung Youl Seok

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. 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
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sohyeon KimDepartment of Neurology, Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 1035 Dalgubeol-Daero, Dalseo-Gu, Daegu, 42601, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5443-386X
Jae-Joon LeeDepartment of Neurology, Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 1035 Dalgubeol-Daero, Dalseo-Gu, Daegu, 42601, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-5260-2817
Jin-Sung ParkDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5506-9206
Minsung KangDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6206-0891
Hung Youl SeokDepartment of Neurology, Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 1035 Dalgubeol-Daero, Dalseo-Gu, Daegu, 42601, Republic of Korea. shy2354@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9938-5355
Keimyung University · KRKyungpook National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the context of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), there are several measures that serve as a biomarker. However, each of the methods has the intrinsic limitations. While neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) have emerged as an additional biomarker for NMOSD, a thorough investigation of their role remains incomplete. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review of the current literature regarding NfL and GFAP as a biomarker and explore their potential utility in NMOSD.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive search using PubMed and Google Scholar to identify peer-reviewed articles investigating NfL and GFAP as a biomarker in NMOSD.

resultsOur search identified 13 relevant studies. NfL consistently showed promise in distinguishing NMOSD patients from healthy individuals, although it had limited specificity in distinguishing NMOSD from other demyelinating diseases. NfL offered certain advantages over GFAP, notably its ability to predict disability worsening during attacks. In contrast, GFAP provided valuable insight, particularly in distinguishing NMOSD from multiple sclerosis and identifying clinical relapses. In addition, GFAP showed predictive potential for future attacks. Some studies even suggested that NfL may serve as an indicator of treatment response in NMOSD.

conclusionsNfL and GFAP hold promise as biomarkers for NMOSD, demonstrating their usefulness in distinguishing patients from healthy individuals, assessing disease severity, and possibly reflecting treatment response. However, it is important to recognize that NfL and GFAP may, at some point, have different roles.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisNeuromyelitis OpticaBiomarkersGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinHumansIntermediate FilamentsNeurofilament ProteinsBiomarkersGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinNeurofilament ProteinsBiomarkerGlial fibrillary acidic proteinNeurofilament light chainNeuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder

Identifiers

PMID38141119
OpenAlexW4390144775

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.