ArticlePloS one2024
Evaluation of autoimmune liver disease antibodies in hepatitis patients.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Autoantibodies in the follow-up of autoimmune hepatitis.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsAutoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is characterized by the presence of auto-antibodies and high blood immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels. In this study, the line immunoassay (LIA) was designed to assess various autoantibodies.
methodsIn total, 1371 patients who underwent autoimmune liver disease antibody testing between July 2019 and November 2022 were enrolled. Autoantibodies including antinuclear antibody (ANA) and anti-mitochondrial antibody (AMA) were tested, and clinical data were collected. Statistical analyses were performed by categorizing the data based on diagnosis and IgG quantification separately. A scoring system was applied to identify individuals with AIH. Patients were also classified into the AIH and non-AIH groups.
resultsThe positivity rate for ANA was 80.2% in the AIH group. The IgG-high group had a high likelihood of the presence of detectable autoantibodies, with anti-Ro-52 being the most frequently detected antibody using LIA. The "Consider AIH" and "AMA" groups had 3-4 times more patients in the IgG-high group than in the "Not Considered" group.
conclusionsAmong autoantibodies, the prevalence of ANA was the highest. As per LIA results, anti-Ro-52 was the most prevalent. AIH cannot be diagnosed based on IgG levels alone and must be distinguished via autoantibody testing. Therefore, extensive testing, including autoantibodies, IgG, ANA, and liver enzyme levels, will help accurately diagnose AIH.
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.