ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Endothelial cell damage in patients with acute graft versus host disease receiving treatment with extracorporeal photopheresis.
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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is a safe, effective treatment for steroid-refractory acute GVHD (SR-aGVHD). Endothelial damage is a pathological substrate of aGVHD. Methods: Endothelial damage biomarkers were measured in SR-aGVHD patients' plasma before (PRE) and 1-month after initiating ECP as second-line therapy to explore differences by treatment response. ECP-treated SR-aGVHD patients (n=35) were classified into good (GR; n=18) and poor (PR; n=17) responders. Endothelial activation biomarkers (soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1, sVCAM-1; von Willebrand Factor, VWF; thrombomodulin, TM; soluble TNF receptor 1, sTNFR1; angiopoietin 2; ANG2); GVHD markers (suppression tumorigenicity 2, ST2; regenerating islet-derived 3-alpha, REG3alpha; T-cell immunoglobulinmucin-3, TIM3); soluble C5b9 (sC5b9), for complement activation; and circulating dsDNA, for neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), were analyzed. The endothelial activation and stress index (EASIX) and C-reactive protein were evaluated. Results: Before ECP, endothelial damage biomarkers were elevated in all patients, with no significant differences between GR and PR. After 1-month, increased levels of REG3alpha and sC5b9, and decreased levels of TIM3, were observed in samples from PR. A panel combining 5 biomarkers (ST2, VWF, NETs, TIM3, ANG2) could identify GR after 1-month on ECP (likelihood ratio 2.0) and predict ECP response. Discussion: We propose a simplified endothelial damage biomarker panel capturing early biological signals associated with response to ECP in SR-aGVHD patients.
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.