SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Surfactant proteins levels in asthmatic patients and their correlation with severity of asthma: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Architecture of Deep Phenotyping in Asthma: Integrating Molecular, Metabolic, and Neuro-Hormonal Endotypes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Promoting immune defensive responses of epithelial cells in airway disease.Frontiers in allergy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurfactant decreases surface tension in the peripheral airways and plays a role in regulating the lung's immune responses. Several reports have documented changes in surfactant proteins levels, especially surfactant protein D (SP-D) and surfactant protein A (SP-A), suggesting their potential as biomarkers for asthma. However, the results of these studies are controversial. This systematic review was done to assess the levels of surfactant proteins in asthmatic patients compared to healthy individuals.
methodsA systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in the Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and ScienceDirect databases to identify studies that assessed surfactants proteins levels in asthmatic patients. Pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using R version 4.4.3 meta package.
resultsA total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were thus considered for this systematic review. Among these, SP-D was the most frequently studied protein in relation to asthma, asthma severity, and lung function parameters in asthmatic patients. Serum and sputum levels of SP-D in asthmatic patients were slightly elevated compared to non-asthmatic individuals. However, these differences were not statistically significant; the pooled SMDs were 0.27 (95% CI: -0.034 to 0.574, P = 0.082) for serum levels and 1.47 (95% CI, -0.197 to 3.103, P = 0.084) for sputum levels. Similarly, no significant difference was detected for the analysis of serum SP-A levels, with SMD = 0.18 (95% CI, -0.505 to 0.866, P = 0.606). Though, some of the reviewed studies showed an association between SP-D levels and disease severity in asthmatic patients.
conclusionAlthough alterations have been observed in asthma and proposed as biomarkers, this systematic review did not find significant differences in the levels between asthmatics and healthy individuals. However, some studies have suggested an association between SP-D levels and asthma severity. Given the limited number of studies investigating this association, further research is needed to validate the clinical relevance of correlation between SP-D levels and asthma severity.
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.