Cited by 365Liver Diseases and ImmunityPediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and TreatmentsIgG4-Related and Inflammatory Diseases

Anti-gp210 and anti-centromere antibodies are different risk factors for the progression of primary biliary cirrhosis

Open access
Nakamura, Minoru, Kondo, Hisayoshi, Mori, Tsuyoshi, Komori, Atsumasa, Matsuyama, Mutsumi, Ito, Masahiro, Takii, Yasushi, Koyabu, Makiko +30 more·2007·Hepatology

Abstract

The predictive role of antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) remains elusive in the long-term outcome of primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC). The progression of PBC was evaluated in association with ANAs using stepwise Cox proportional hazard regression and an unconditional stepwise logistic regression model based on the data of 276 biopsy-proven, definite PBC patients who have been registered to the National Hospital Organization Study Group for Liver Disease in Japan (NHOSLJ). When death of hepatic failure/liver transplantation (LT) was defined as an end-point, positive anti-gp210 antibodies (Hazard ratio (HR) = 6.742, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.408, 18.877), the late stage (Scheuer's stage 3, 4) (HR = 4.285, 95% CI:1.682,10.913) and male sex (HR = 3.266, 95% CI: 1.321,8.075) were significant risk factors at the time of initial liver biopsy. When clinical progression to death of hepatic failure/LT (i.e., hepatic failure type progression) or to the development of esophageal varices or hepatocellular carcinoma without developing jaundice (Total bilirubin < 1.5 mg/dL) (i.e., portal hypertension type progression) was defined as an end-point in the early stage (Scheuer's stage 1, 2) PBC patients, positive anti-gp210 antibodies was a significant risk factor for hepatic failure type progression [odds ratio (OR) = 33.777, 95% CI: 5.930, 636.745], whereas positive anti-centromere antibodies was a significant risk factor for portal hypertension type progression (OR = 4.202, 95% CI: 1.307, 14.763). Histologically, positive anti-gp210 antibodies was most significantly associated with more severe interface hepatitis and lobular inflammation, whereas positive anticentromere antibodies was most significantly associated with more severe ductular reaction. Conclusion: These results indicate 2 different progression types in PBC, hepatic failure type and portal hypertension type progression, which may be represented by positive-anti-gp210 and positive-anticentromere antibodies, respectively. (Hepatology 2007;45:118–127.)

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.21472

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is evidence to suggest that PBC-linked ANA (in particular anti-gp210/anti-nuclear rim antibody) may be associated with more rapidly progressive disease and disease which is less responsive to UDCA therapy.

    “There is evidence to suggest that PBC-linked ANA (in particular anti-gp210/anti-nuclear rim antibody) may be associated with more rapidly progressive disease and disease which is less responsive to UDCA therapy.76 79–82”

    From The British Society of Gastroenterology/UK-PBC primary biliary cholangitis treatment and management guidelines (2018) · cites this paper as [76]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) identifies persistent anti-gp210 antibodies as a strong risk factor for progression to end-stage hepatic failure. It also links antibody disappearance after UDCA initiation with a favorable clinical course, but does not establish that anti-gp210-positive disease is less responsive to UDCA therapy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There are data to suggest that ANA +ve patients progress more rapidly.

    “There are data to suggest that ANA +ve patients progress more rapidly.76”

    From The British Society of Gastroenterology/UK-PBC primary biliary cholangitis treatment and management guidelines (2018) · cites this paper as [76]

    The Univariate Analysis of Transplantation-Free Survival reports greater progression to liver-associated death or transplantation among anti-gp210-positive PBC patients, but no significant difference for patients positive for several other ANAs. The Discussion also links anti-centromere positivity to a different progression pattern. These findings support an association for specific ANA subtypes, not ANA positivity in general. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Anti-centromere antibodies have been reported to have potential prognostic impact, with a portal hypertensive phenotype.

    “Anti-centromere antibodies have also been reported to have potential prognostic impact (portal hypertensive phenotype) [79,80,78].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [1]1. Rubin E, Schaffner F, Popper H. Primary biliary cirrhosis. Am J Pathol 1965;46:387-407.
  2. [18]18. Pihoker C, Gilliam LK, Hampe CS, Lernmark A. Autoantibodies in dia- betes. Diabetes 2005;54:S52-S61.
  3. [23]23. Scheuer PJ. Primary biliary cirrhosis. Proc R Soc Med 1967;60:1257- 1260.
  4. [30]30. Burlingame RW, Cervera R. Anti-chromatin (anti-nucleosome) autoanti- bodies. Autoimmun Rev 2002;1:321-328.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nakamura, M., Kondo, H., Mori, T., Komori, A., Matsuyama, M., Ito, M., Takii, Y., Koyabu, M., Yokoyama, T., Migita, K., Daikoku, M., Abiru, S., Yatsuhashi, H., Takezaki, E., Masaki, N., Sugi, K., Honda, K., Adachi, H., Nishi, H., Watanabe, Y., Nakamura, Y., Shimada, M., Komatsu, T., Saito, A., Saoshiro, T., Harada, H., Sodeyama, T., Hayashi, S., Masumoto, A., Sando, T., Yamamoto, T., Sakai, H., Kobayashi, M., Muro, T., Koga, M., Shums, Z., Norman, G. L., & Ishibashi, H.
Affiliations
  • Nagasaki Medical Center (JP)
  • Nagasaki University (JP)
  • National Hospital Organization (JP)
Corresponding author
Nakamura, Minoru
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2007-01
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
118-127
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967089359
Cited by
365
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 27
FWCI
10.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Diseases and Immunity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › IgG4-Related and Inflammatory Diseases
Keywords
anti-gp210 antibodies, anti-centromere antibodies, antinuclear antibodies, disease progression, liver failure, liver transplantation, portal hypertension, esophageal varices, hepatocellular carcinoma, interface hepatitis, ductular reaction, lobular inflammation, risk factors, prognostic factors, sex differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antibodies, Antinuclear, Autoantigens, Centromere, Chromatin, Esophageal and Gastric Varices, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Portal, Liver Cirrhosis, Biliary, Male, Middle Aged, Nuclear Proteins, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Multivariate Analysis, Liver Failure, Disease Progression, Nuclear Pore Complex Proteins, Antigens, Nuclear

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review