ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Clinical characteristics and risk factors of protein-losing enteropathy: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Protein-losing enteropathy (PLE) is characterized by excessive gastrointestinal protein loss, yet systematic comparative studies across etiologies remain limited. This study aimed to characterize the confirmed PLE cohort in our center, with a focused comparison between connective tissue disease-associated PLE (CTD-PLE) and lymphatic drainage disorder-associated PLE (LDD-PLE), describe follow-up observations, and explore routine clinical indicators that may assist etiologic differentiation. Methods: This retrospective study included 146 patients admitted to Beijing Shijitan Hospital between January 2014 and December 2024 with PLE confirmed by 99mTc-HSA scintigraphy. Patients were classified as CTD-PLE or LDD-PLE according to the final clinical diagnosis. Clinical features, laboratory findings, and available follow-up data were analyzed, and logistic regression together with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to explore factors associated with CTD-PLE. Results: The cohort included 146 patients (median onset age 26 years; 30 CTD-PLE and 116 LDD-PLE). Edema (84.2%) and serous cavity effusions (76.7%) were the most frequent manifestations. Comparative analysis showed that CTD-PLE patients were older, predominantly female, and had more frequent thrombosis and higher D-dimer levels than LDD-PLE patients. CTD-PLE also showed distinct laboratory features, including higher total cholesterol, triglycerides, and globulin levels, whereas LDD-PLE was associated with lower lymphocyte counts and more frequent diarrhea. Multivariate analysis identified age at onset, Hb, and total cholesterol as independent predictors of CTD-PLE. The three-variable model showed good apparent discrimination in this single-center cohort (AUC = 0.890), while C3 showed the best single-variable discrimination. Among patients with available follow-up, 19/20 CTD-PLE patients receiving glucocorticoids plus immunosuppressants achieved symptom remission with a median ALB improvement of 9.5 (3.8, 19.6) g/L, whereas 23/43 surgically treated LDD-PLE patients achieved symptom remission with a median ALB improvement of 2.0 (-0.5, 5.8) g/L. Conclusion: PLE with different etiologies shows distinct clinical and laboratory patterns. Age at onset, Hb, and total cholesterol may assist preliminary etiologic differentiation, although the proposed model requires validation in independent cohorts. The observed lipid, coagulation, and correlation patterns, together with the follow-up findings, provide exploratory clues to distinct mechanisms and treatment trajectories.
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.