ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Cross-platform analytical assessment of serum GFAP quantification in multiple sclerosis: SIMOA versus two automated immunoassays.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification of blood-based neurovascular unit biomarkers: an analytical platform comparison study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) in biofluids: analytical considerations and clinical relevance in neurodegenerative diseases.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Cross-platform comparison of blood glial fibrillary acidic protein quantification in healthy controls and multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein (sGFAP) is a promising biomarker, but its quantification mainly relies on SIMOA, a technology not widely available in clinical practice. Objectives: To evaluate the analytical performance of two high-throughput automated platforms-Alinity Methods: A retrospective longitudinal study included 107 serum samples from 23 MS patients. sGFAP was measured with SIMOA SR-X Results: Passing-Bablok regression yielded slopes of 0.85 (SIMOA-Lumipulse), 0.81 (SIMOA-Alinity), and 0.95 (Lumipulse-Alinity), with intercepts of -0.32, -0.35, and -0.05. Mean log-biases were -0.622, -0.733, and 0.109. Correlations between log-means and log-differences were Conclusion: Automated platforms, particularly Lumipulse, showed strong concordance with SIMOA supporting the role in analytical monitoring.
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.