ArticleAME case reports2025
The diagnosis of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis has been 'masked' by asthma: a case report.
Article in AME case reports, 2025. 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.
- Clinical, Biomarker, and Radiological Progression from Asthma to Systemic Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with asthma exhibit a significantly heightened susceptibility to eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) when compared to the general population. Vigilance for EGPA manifestations is crucial, especially in cases where asthma remains poorly controlled despite high-dose corticosteroid therapy or when eosinophil counts exceed 5%. The diagnosis of EGPA can be complex due to the absence of definitive biomarkers, as indicated by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)'s 1990 classification criteria. EGPA is categorized as an antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) associated vasculitis, with updated classification criteria released in 2022, which require a cumulative score of 6 or more for the diagnosis of small and medium vessel vasculitis. Enhancing knowledge of EGPA facilitates its early detection and effective management. Case Description: The patient was initially diagnosed with allergic rhinitis in 2006 and developed cough and wheezing in 2016. In 2017, EGPA was diagnosed based on ACR criteria, with a cumulative score of 14 according to the 2022 ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria, indicating small and medium vessel vasculitis. The patient showed myocardial, gastric, and neurological involvement, reflecting generalized EGPA. Prognostic assessments should use the five-factor score (FFS), which indicates a 46% 5-year mortality rate for those with an FFS of 2 or higher. This patient had an FFS of 3, tested negative for ANCA, and cardiac emission computed tomography (ECT) confirmed myocardial involvement. However, as EGPA was diagnosed only 13 months after the onset of wheezing, the patient had been undergoing glucocorticoid therapy, as of today (7 years later), has effectively managed the symptoms and facilitated normal daily activities. Conclusions: If asthma symptoms persist despite intensive corticosteroid treatment or the eosinophil count exceeds 5%, consider the possibility of EGPA. The presence of ANCA exerts a substantial impact on the prognostic outcomes in EGPA. ANCA-negative patients typically exhibit reduced survival rates, primarily attributed to a higher incidence of cardiac involvement. Nevertheless, advancements in early diagnosis and therapeutic interventions have led to improved survival rates, even in cases complicated by cardiac and pulmonary manifestations.
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.