ArticleVox sanguinis2026
International survey on the management of IgA deficiency: The BEST Collaborative Study.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- International survey on the management of IgA deficiency: The BEST Collaborative Study.Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesSelective immunoglobulin A (IgA) deficiency is the most common human immunodeficiency, affecting approximately 1 in 500-800 individuals of European ancestry. It is defined by a serum IgA level below 7 mg/dL, with normal immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) levels. Since 1968, severe allergic transfusion reactions have been reported in IgA-deficient patients, often linked to anti-IgA antibodies. This led to recommendations for using IgA-deficient blood components in affected individuals. However, due to the rarity of such reactions, standardized and evidence-based guidelines are lacking, while blood services face logistical challenges maintaining registries of IgA-deficient donors and inventories of compatible products. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn international survey was conducted to assess current practices in managing IgA deficiency. The survey explored the frequency of transfusion reactions involving IgA/anti-IgA, detection methods for IgA deficiency and anti-IgA antibodies, reasons for requesting IgA-deficient products, product availability and strategies to facilitate access to IgA-deficient products.
resultsParticipants from 14 countries/regions across four continents reported a wide variability in defining IgA deficiency, criteria for recommending IgA-deficient products and anti-IgA testing practices.
conclusionThese findings highlight the need for international reference standards and harmonized recommendations to improve the management of IgA-deficient patients. Establishing harmonized best practices and evidence-based guidelines should enhance patient safety and support clinical decision making globally.
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.