ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Study on the dynamic changes in antinuclear antibody spectrum in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective analysis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with COVID-19 often produce multiple autoantibodies that impact immune function. This study aimed to assess changes in immune status and correlation with SARS-CoV-2 infection by analyzing dynamic shifts in patients' antinuclear antibody (ANA) profiles.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on ANA data and clinical characteristics of 680 patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia admitted to Taizhou Enze Medical Center (Group) between December 7, 2022, and January 31, 2023. The analysis covered three phases: early COVID-19 (within one year before admission, T1), COVID-19 phase (during hospitalization, T2), and late COVID-19 (within one year after discharge, T3). ANA quantification was primarily performed using indirect immunofluorescence, and the magnetic stripe immunofluorescence luminescence method was employed to detect the ANA profile (ENA), including anti-dsDNA, nucleosome, Sm, SS-A/Ro52kD, SS-A/Ro60kD, SS-B/La, PCNA, AMA M2, Scl-70, and Jo-1.
resultsDuring the T2 phase, 680 patients were analyzed. The positive rate of the ANA test was 35%. The proportion of autoimmune diseases (AID) in ANA-positive patients was higher than in ANA-negative patients (22%vs.7%). The ANA-positive group with AID showed higher ANA titers compared to the ANA-positive group without AID. During the follow-up one year before and after SARS-CoV-2 infection, in the T1-T2 group, there were two cases of ANA changing from negative to positive (one with AID, one without AID). The positive intensity of ANA increased by 15.6% and decreased by 20%. In the T2-T3 group, the positive intensity of ANA increased by 3.3% and decreased by 33.3%. Followed up of 7 patients with high ANA titers in T2 phase, among whom 5 cases did not support AID from the perspective of diagnosis and medication, and 2 cases were diagnosed with SLE after being infected with SARS-CoV-2.
conclusionsSARS-CoV-2 infection induces overactivation of the immune system, significantly impacting patients with autoimmune diseases. For patients without autoimmune diseases, ANA produced due to COVID-19 does not persist. Some COVID-19 patients may trigger their own immune system response.
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.