ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Comparison of pathological features of patients with antibody-negative and positive primary biliary cholangitis.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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.
- Antimitochondrial Antibody Measurements in the Diagnosis of Antimitochondrial Antibody-negative and Alkaline Phosphatase-positive Primary Biliary Cholangitis: An Update and Review.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2026Review
- Autoantibodies in the diagnostics, prognostics and follow-up of primary biliary cholangitis.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the differences and similarities among primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with positive and negative expression of autoantibodies (anti-mitochondrial antibodies AMA and AMA-M2, antinuclear antibodies anti-gp210, and anti-sp100).
methodsClinical and pathological data of 85 PBC in patients who underwent liver puncture biopsy were retrospectively collected from January 2016 to September 2018 at the Second Hospital of Nanjing. The differences in clinical and pathological indexes of PBC between autoantibody negative and positive groups were analyzed by SPSS 25.0, and the patients' previous autoantibody indexes were collected for follow-up.
resultsThe average age of 85 PBC patients was (52.2 ± 9.2) years old, including 15 males (17.6%) and 70 females (82.4%), with a male-to-female ratio of 1:4.7. Fifty-nine autoantibody-positive cases and 26 autoantibody-negative cases were 50 (84.7%) AMA positive, 51 (86.4%) AMA-M2 positive, 21 (35.6%) anti-gp210 positive, and 15 (25.4%) anti-sp100 positive. The distribution of CK7-positive hepatocytes and the degree of bile duct injury in the portal area of PBC patients in the antibody-negative group were lower than those in the antibody-positive group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the distribution of interface inflammation, plasma cell grade, ductular reaction, and fibrosis between the two groups. When the autoimmune antibodies were reexamined at 2 months-7 years (median time 1 year), AMA, AMA-M2, anti-gp210, and anti-sp100 were still negative in 16 antibody-negative patients.
conclusionsThe pathological symptoms and diagnostic patterns of autoantibody-negative and positive PBC were generally comparable. In this study, the pathological manifestations of antibody-negative PBC were similar to those of antibody-positive PBC, but the lymphocyte aggregation in antibody-negative PBC was more severe than that in antibody-positive PBC, while the degree of bile duct injury and CK7-positive hepatocytes were milder than that in antibody-positive PBC, suggesting that the overall pathological changes of antibody-negative PBC were slightly milder than those of antibody-positive PBC.
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.