ArticleYonsei medical journal2026
Distinguishing Takayasu Arteritis and Giant Cell Arteritis Based on Large-Vessel Involvement Patterns.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTakayasu arteritis (TAK) and extracranial large-vessel (LV) giant cell arteritis (GCA) share overlapping features, making differential diagnosis between the two diseases challenging. We aimed to identify LV involvement patterns that could accurately differentiate TAK and GCA. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 181 patients (TAK, n=175; GCA, n=6). LV involvement patterns were assessed using computed tomography (CT) and/or ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT performed at diagnosis. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify LV involvement patterns that accurately distinguish TAK and GCA. Area under the curve (AUC) was estimated to determine the accuracy.
resultsThe right subclavian artery (30.3% vs. 83.3%,
conclusionDistinct patterns of LV involvement, particularly aortic arch involvement, either alone or combined with right subclavian artery involvement, could accurately differentiate TAK and GCA.
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.