ArticleTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Diagnostic utility of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and anti-Scl-70 positivity for interstitial lung disease in diffuse systemic sclerosis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundInterstitial lung disease (ILD) is a major cause of mortality in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc). Although high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) is recommended for diagnosis, it is costly, time-consuming, and prone to subjective interpretation.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the utility of hematological biomarkers, specifically routine blood parameters and their derived indices in discriminating dcSSc-ILD to support clinical decision-making.DesignRetrospective, cross-sectional study.MethodsPatients monitored with dcSSc who underwent HRCT evaluation were analyzed. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the presence of ILD to evaluate routine blood parameters and derived indices. Significant parameters from univariate analysis were further evaluated using two separate multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, gender, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), anti-Scl-70, immunosuppressive use, newly diagnosed status and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR).ResultsOut of 117 patients (mean age: 49.03 ± 13.48 years, 90.6% female), dcSSc-ILD was detected in 53% (n=62). Within the cohort, 42.7% (n=50) were receiving immunosuppressive therapy, and 35.0% (n=41) were newly diagnosed with dcSSc. Patients with dcSSc-ILD demonstrated significantly higher ESR (p=0.002), ESR-to-C-reactive protein ratio (ECR) (p=0.042), and ESR-to-lymphocyte ratio (SLR) (p=0.003) levels compared to those without ILD. Anti-Scl-70 positivity was observed in 39.3% of the cohort and was significantly more prevalent in the ILD group (50.0% vs. 27.3%, p=0.012). ROC curve analysis revealed an optimal ESR cut-off value of >23.5 mm/hour for identifying ILD, yielding a high specificity of 90.9% and a sensitivity of 43.5% (AUC: 0.667, 95% CI: 0.569-0.766, p=0.002). In multivariable regression analyses, the diagnostic value of ESR and anti-Scl-70 remained significant and independent after adjusting for age, gender, MLR and immunosuppressive therapy (Model 1), as well as new diagnosis status (Model 2). Each 1 mm/hour increase in ESR was associated with an approximately 7% increase in the probability of dcSSc-ILD.ConclusionESR and Anti-Scl-70 positivity serve as modest but highly specific independent indicators of lung involvement in dcSSc. While Anti-Scl-70 provides significant etiological stratification, ESR's high specificity makes it a valuable, cost-effective preliminary triage tool for identifying patients at higher risk for ILD.
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.