ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Biomarkers in Rheumatoid Arthritis: From Traditional Serology to Precision Medicine Integration.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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.
- Biomarkers of treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis: from conventional markers to tissue immunophenotype.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Theranostic Nanoprobes for Rheumatoid Arthritis: From Inflammation Visualization to Guided Precision Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Immunological heterogeneity in rheumatoid arthritis: challenges in early-stage stratification, non-response to targeted therapy, and the restoration of immune tolerance.Frontiers in immunology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The biomarker landscape in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is evolving from reliance on traditional markers toward integrated, multimodal strategies enabling precision medicine approaches. To critically evaluate emerging biomarkers across serological, cellular, genetic, imaging, and multi-omic domains, distinguishing those approaching clinical readiness from those requiring further development. In this study, a narrative review of the literature published between 2000 and 2024 relevant to clinical decision-making in RA was conducted. Among novel serological markers, 14-3-3η protein and anti-carbamylated protein antibodies show the strongest validation for seronegative disease and prognostic stratification. Calprotectin demonstrates utility for disease activity monitoring and de-escalation decisions. Multi-biomarker disease activity scores provide an objective assessment but lack outcome trial validation. Musculoskeletal ultrasound offers accessible imaging biomarker capability, while MRI bone marrow edema remains the strongest structural progression predictor. Synovial tissue pathotyping has demonstrated proof-of-concept for treatment stratification. Genetic, epigenetic, and metabolomic approaches remain investigational. Key clinical implications include using 14-3-3η and calprotectin to inform seronegative diagnosis and de-escalation decisions, integrating ultrasound for remission verification, and recognizing that emerging biomarkers for extra-articular complications, including cardiovascular risk and venous thromboembolism, represent important unmet needs.
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.