ArticleRMD open2024
New blood biomarkers and imaging for disease stratification and monitoring of giant cell arteritis.
Article in RMD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Definitions of elementary ultrasound lesions in Takayasu arteritis: a study from the OMERACT Ultrasound Working Group.RMD open · 2025Pooled it
- Scoping review of clinical, laboratory, histopathological and imaging predictors of relapse in adults with biopsy- or temporal artery ultrasound-confirmed giant cell arteritis on standard therapy with glucocorticoids alone or in combination with biologics.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2026Review
- Imaging-guided stratification in giant cell arteritis: prognostic and therapeutic implications.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
- The role of calprotectin in giant cell arteritis - from pathophysiology to possible clinical applications.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Relapses and late complications remain a concern in giant cell arteritis (GCA). Monitoring strategies are required to effectively tailor treatment and improve patients' outcomes. Current monitoring of GCA is based on clinical assessment and evaluation of traditional inflammatory markers such as C reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate; however, this approach has limited value in patients receiving interleukin (IL)-6 blocking agents. New blood biomarkers that are less dependent on the IL-6 axis such as IL-23, B cell activating factor, osteopontin and calprotectin have been explored, but none of them has yet accumulated sufficient evidence to qualify as a routine follow-up parameter. Imaging techniques, including ultrasound and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, potentially offer additional insights; however, the choice of the imaging method as well as its interpretation must be investigated further. Future studies are required to investigate the outcome of patients with GCA whose treatment decisions are based on traditional plus novel (laboratory and imaging) biomarkers as compared with those undergoing conventional monitoring strategies.
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.