ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2025
The association of C-reactive protein to albumin ratio wıth lichen planus.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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.
- Risk Factors for Sepsis in Pediatric All During Induction Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn some diseases associated with inflammation, the C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio can be used as a biomarker of inflammation. Since lichen planus is a chronic inflammatory disease, our study aimed to investigate the relationship between C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and disease activity and whether it plays a role in determining disease prognosis, and compare them with those in subjects without lichen planus.
methodsThis is a case-control study. Demographic data, clinical features, and laboratory measures, including neutrophil, lymphocyte, eosinophil, platelet counts, neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, albumin, and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio were statistically compared between patients with lichen planus (n=61) and controls (n=64).
resultsAlbumin and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (p<0.001), C-reactive protein (p=0.017), C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (p=0.016), and neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio (p=0.02) were significantly higher in the patient group than in the control group. C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (p=0.003, OR 1.2), neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio (p=0.02, OR 1.4), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (p=0.003, OR 1.1) were effective in differentiating patients from the healthy group. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate>4.5 mm/h, C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio>0.6, and neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio>1 were useful in showing disease activity, of which C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio has the best value with 92% sensitivity. C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio has a sensitivity of 100% and is more effective and sensitive than other markers in distinguishing between mild and severe groups and between single and multiple involvement.
conclusionElevated C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio levels may be considered a potential marker for lichen planus. It may be highly sensitive to follow-up of systemic inflammation and disease activity in patients with lichen planus. However, further prospective studies may confirm the association between C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and lichen planus.
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.