ArticleArthritis research & therapy2025
Clinicopathological profile of eosinophilic fasciitis: a retrospective cohort study from a neuromuscular disorder center in China.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Prayer sign as a marker of disease severity and treatment response in eosinophilic fasciitis: A case series.JAAD case reports · 2026Article
- Case Report: Eosinophilic fasciitis with PM-Scl antibody positivity: expanding the serological spectrum.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- [Eosinophilic fascitis: A case report and literature review].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Review
- The utility of rituximab in patients with eosinophilic fasciitis: case series from an Australian tertiary multidisciplinary clinic.Clinical rheumatology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize the clinical and myo-fascial histopathological features, along with long-term treatment outcomes of patients with eosinophilic fasciitis (EF).
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of the clinical, serological, myo-fascial pathological features, as well as the long-term follow-up outcomes of EF patients between January 2011 and August 2023 at our neuromuscular disorder (NMD) center.
resultsSeventeen patients were included, and a male predominance (12/17, 70.6%) was identified. The most common clinical manifestation was skin thickening (100%), always distal to the elbow and knee joints, occupied by limited joint mobility (12/17, 70.6%). The "prayer sign" was observed in 7 (41.2%) patients. Eosinophilia was identified in only 7 (41.2%) patients, including 6 in the blood and 3 in tissue. Anti-Ha antibody was confirmed in one patient (P17). Typical fascial edema with or without involvement of the adjacent subcutaneous tissues was exhibited on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in all 9 patients. The perifascicular pattern of MHC-I and/or MHC-II upregulation without MxA expression was identified in 56.3% (9/16) of the patients' muscle specimens. Typical perifascicular atrophy was identified in 4 patients. Complete recovery was noted in 5 patients, including 4 patients treated with prednisone as monotherapy, and 1 patient treated with prednisone combined with D-penicillamine.
conclusionsThe "prayer sign" might be an important clinical feature of EF. Perifascicular upregulation of MHC-I and/or MHC-II but negative expression of MxA, with or without PFA, represents a unique pathological phenotype of EF. Most patients show favorable outcome following steroid monotherapy or in combination with immunosuppressants, underscoring the autoimmune pathogenic nature of this disease.
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.