ArticleInfection2026
Novel blood biomarkers distinguish active pulmonary tuberculosis from non-pulmonary tuberculosis: a prospective, large scale, clinical trial in Eastern China.
Article in Infection, 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.
- Article
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
Abstract
objectivesActive Tuberculosis (TB) had the challenge in early detection. Our pilot study showed four novel diagnostic biomarkers had high value of TB diagnosis. The aim of the study was to further verify the diagnosis value of these biomarkers for active pulmonary TB (PTB) from non-TB through clinical trial with large scale samples.
methodsThe prospective, large scale, multicenter, diagnostic clinical trial was performed from 2022 Jan to 2024 Dec in Eastern China. PTB suspects met inclusion criteria were enrolled the study, taken RNA abstract from the Peripheral venous blood for RNA examination of BATF2, UBE2L6, SERPING1, VAMP5 and tested by QFT-GIT as well, the diagnosis value of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and AUC for active TB by single and fixed groups of biomarkers were calculated and evaluated.
results890 cases were finally included the study, containing 564 cases of PTB (365 had definite and 199 had probable TB) and 326 cases of non-PTB. Any single biomarker from BATF2, UBE2L6, SERPNG1 or VAMP5 has advantage diagnosis values over QFT-GIT, UBE2L6 had the best value of the diagnosis (AUC 0.84) of active TB. Combination of UBE2L6/SERPING1/VAMP5 had best diagnosis value of active PTB (sensitivity of 70.5% and specificity of 95.4%) from non-PTB.
conclusionsBlood derived transcription level of combination on Three-genes (UBE2L6, SERPING1, VAMP5) had excellent diagnosis value of active PTB from non-TB diseases, which deserved clinical application in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42671775What 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.