ArticleClinics and practice2025
Biomarker-Based Diagnosis of Contact Dermatitis: A Step Towards More Accurate and Patient-Friendly Testing.
Article in Clinics and practice, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContact dermatitis (CD) is a prevalent inflammatory skin condition, with diagnostic challenges in distinguishing allergic (ACD) from irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). This study aimed to explore cholesterol-derived biomarkers as potential diagnostic tools. As cholesterol derivatives play key roles in skin barrier integrity and inflammation, they are promising candidates for assessing skin barrier disruption in CD.
methodsStratum corneum samples were collected by tape stripping from experimentally induced and chronic lesions, as well as healthy non-lesional skin. Biomarkers Cholesterol Sulfate (Chol-Sulf), Cholesterol Glucosyl (Chol-Glc) and their ratio were quantified. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, Pearson's correlation, logistic regression and ROC curves.
resultsChol-Glc and the Chol-Glc/Chol-Sulf ratio differed significantly across the diagnostic groups, while Chol-Sulf did not. Logistic regression and ROC analyses revealed a limited standalone diagnostic accuracy for the individual biomarkers (all AUC < 0.6).
conclusionsChol-Glc and the ratio exhibit disease-specific patterns relevant for subtype discrimination. Although insufficient as independent diagnostic tools, these markers may contribute to future multivariate diagnostic models for CD diagnosis.
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.