ArticleLupus science & medicine2026
Clinical utility of a multianalyte lupus risk score incorporating cell-bound complement activation products: a systematic evaluation.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly and accurate SLE diagnosis is critical to identify and treat inflammatory organ manifestations before irreversible organ damage occurs. Conventional serological tests (anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA), anti-Smith) and complement biomarkers (C3/C4) lack sensitivity in early disease, contributing to diagnostic delays. We conducted systematic analysis of a Multianalyte Assay Panel (MAP) index which integrates cell-bound complement activation products (CB-CAPs) with conventional markers to evaluate its diagnostic performance across diverse US clinical cohorts.
methodsBiomarker data from studies conducted between 2011 and 2025 were analysed for 3132 individuals: 1210 who met the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for SLE, 687 healthy controls and 1235 disease controls. CB-CAPs were measured by semiquantitative flow cytometry; autoantibodies by ELISA; complement C3/C4 by immunoturbidimetry. Diagnostic ORs (DORs), likelihood ratios (LRs) and sensitivity/specificity were calculated. Sensitivity between the algorithm and conventional serological and complement tests was compared within the SLE cohort.
resultsAgainst healthy controls, the MAP index demonstrated the strongest diagnostic accuracy (DOR=105.0) compared with CB-CAPs alone (56.8), anti-dsDNA/Smith (31.8) and complement C3/C4 (8.2). Against disease controls, performance of CB-CAPs alone, anti-dsDNA/Smith and C3/C4 remained superior (DOR=22.3 vs 20.3, 13.7 and 8.8). The MAP index yielded the highest LR+ (33.7) and lowest LR- (0.3). Within the SLE cohort, the MAP index showed higher sensitivity than anti-dsDNA (OR=27.5), B lymphocyte-bound C4d (20.8) and erythrocyte-bound C4d (14.6) (all adjusted p<0.001). Integration of the algorithm identified 24.5% more SLE cases than conventional markers (serologies and complement), reducing the proportion of patients with negative serologies and normal complement from 52.0% to 27.5%.
conclusionsThe MAP index integrating CB-CAPs demonstrated markedly superior diagnostic accuracy and generalisability compared with conventional serological tests alone. Its enhanced sensitivity and specificity address key diagnostic gaps, supporting an earlier more definitive SLE diagnosis with potential for earlier intervention, prevention of organ damage and improved long-term outcomes.
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.