ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2024
Comparison of ELISA with automated ECLIA for IL-6 determination in COVID-19 patients: An Italian real-life experience.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic Relevance of Inflammatory Cytokines Il-6 and TNF-Alpha in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic significance of pre-intervention circulating cytokines in digestive system cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Assay-Dependent Variability in RBP4 and Adiponectin Quantification Affects Associations with Coronary Disease Severity and Doppler Echocardiographic Indices: A Comparative Study of Immunoturbidimetry and ELISA.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a wide spectrum of clinical severity. A cytokine storm is associated with COVID-19 severity. Of these, IL-6 is significantly associated with higher mortality and is also a marker for predicting disease prognosis. IL-6 may act as a target for therapeutics and, a blockade of IL-6 function by Tocilizumab has been described as a treatment of the inflammatory process COVID-19-related. This study aims to describe our experience comparing two different methods, in detail Human IL-6 Instant ELISA and the Elecsys IL-6 based on ECLIA, for the IL-6 assessment. Design and methods: IL-6 levels from serum samples of 104 COVID-19 patients, admitted to the AOU Careggi (Hospital in Florence -Italy), were assessed by using the two above-mentioned methods, and the results were analysed through Passing-Bablok regression fit and Bland-Altman plot. Results: The regression exhibited a linear relation between the methods with a regression equation (y = - 0.13 + 0.63 x; 95 % C.I. intercept = - 0.13 to 4.55; 95 % C.I. slope = 1.03 to 1.26 with R Conclusions: The two assays showed good comparability. However, because of the extremely wide linear range of the ECLIA, its throughput and its capacity for immune profiling, it represents an interesting emerging technology in the immunology field.
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.