ArticleACR open rheumatology2024
Phage Immunoprecipitation-Sequencing Reveals CDHR5 Autoantibodies in Select Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 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.
- Autoantibodies in chronic non-infectious respiratory diseases: a scoping review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- To B or Not to B: Germinal Center Responses in Progressive Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- T Regulatory Mechanisms in Airway and Interstitial Lung Disease.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Ocular Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid Demonstrates a Distinct Autoantibody Profile from Those of Other Autoimmune Blistering Diseases: A Preliminary Study.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Quantification of autoantibodies using a luminescent profiling method in autoimmune interstitial lung disease.Frontiers in immunology · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveInterstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a heterogeneous group of disorders that can develop in patients with connective tissue diseases. Establishing autoimmunity in ILD impacts prognosis and treatment. Patients with ILD are screened for autoimmunity by measuring antinuclear autoantibodies, rheumatoid factors, and other nonspecific tests. However, this approach may miss autoimmunity that manifests as autoantibodies to tissue antigens not previously defined in ILD.
methodsWe use Phage Immunoprecipitation-Sequencing (PhIP-Seq) to conduct an autoantibody discovery screen of patients with ILD and controls. We screened for novel autoantigen candidates using PhIP-Seq. We next developed a radio-labeled binding assay and validated the leading candidate in 398 patients with ILD recruited from two academic medical centers and 138 blood bank individuals that formed our reference cohort.
resultsPhIP-Seq identified 17 novel autoreactive targets, and machine learning classifiers derived from these targets discriminated ILD serum from controls. Among the 17 candidates, we validated CDHR5 and found CDHR5 autoantibodies in patients with rheumatologic disorders and importantly, patients not previously diagnosed with autoimmunity. Using survival and transplant free-survival data available from one of the two centers, patients with CDHR5 autoantibodies showed worse survival compared with other patients with connective tissue disease ILD.
conclusionWe used PhIP-Seq to define a novel CDHR5 autoantibody in a subset of select patients with ILD. Our data complement a recent study showing polymorphisms in the CDHR5-IRF7 gene locus strongly associated with titer of anticentromere antibodies in systemic sclerosis, creating a growing body of evidence suggesting a link between CDHR5 and autoimmunity.
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.