ArticleMycoses2025
Comparative Analysis of Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA)-Based Tests in the Diagnosis of Invasive Aspergillosis in Patients With Hematologic Malignancies.
Article in Mycoses, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chemiluminescence Immunoassay and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay in the Diagnosis of Pemphigoid and Pemphigus: A Comparative Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Biomarkers in Invasive Pulmonary Fungal Infections: Where Do We Stand?Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Role of Pharmacies in Providing Point-of-Care Services in the Era of Digital Health and Artificial Intelligence: An Updated Review of Technologies, Regulation and Socioeconomic Considerations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Establishment of sensitive sandwich-type chemiluminescence immunoassay forFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimRapid chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIA) have emerged as a promising alternative to traditional serological methods for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of rapid CLIA tests in IA.
methodsPatient group consisted of 17 patients who were diagnosed with probable IA according to EORTC/MSG criteria. Patients without invasive fungal infection (IFI) were defined as the control group, whereas healthy volunteers were also included. A total of 93 serum samples were used in this study. Platelia Aspergillus Ag test and Dynamiker Aspergillus Ag Kit, CLIA tests Aspergillus Galactomannan Detection Kit and Fungus (1-3) ꞵ-D-Glucan Detection Kit, were used. Specificity, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the overall diagnostic performance of CLIA tests comparing FDA-approved GM ELISA test.
resultsThe sensitivity of the CLIA galactomannan (CLIA GM) test was 70.6%, specificity 92.1%, PPV 66.7% and NPV 93.3% (p < 0.001), while the sensitivity of the CLIA beta-glucan (CLIA BDG) test was 88.2%, specificity 81.6%, PPV 51.7% and NPV 96.9% (p < 0.001). Using the PlateliaTM Aspergillus Ag Test as the reference method, the areas under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve were 0.878 for CLIA BDG and 0.869 for CLIA GM.
conclusionsCLIA-based tests were evaluated as being rapid diagnostic tests for IA since their NPVs were found to be very high. Integrating CLIA into clinical practice may significantly improve diagnostic efficiency and patient outcomes.
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.