Cited by 34Mast cells and histamineFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchAsthma and respiratory diseases

Mast cell activation syndrome: Importance of consensus criteria and call for research

Open access
Valent, Peter, Akin, Cem, Bonadonna, Patrizia, Hartmann, Karin, Broesby-Olsen, Sigurd, Brockow, Knut, Butterfield, Joseph H., Reiter, Andreas +13 more·2018·Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

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 · 10.1016/j.jaci.2018.06.004

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • After deliberations and shared practical experience, the faculty produced a consensus proposal and introduced the 20% + 2 formula at the Working Conference.

    “After in-depth deliberations and based on shared practical experience, the faculty did come up with a consensus proposal and put forth the 20% + 2 formula during the Working Conference [21].”

    From Why the 20% + 2 Tryptase Formula Is a Diagnostic Gold Standard for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and Mast Cell Activation Syndrome (2019) · cites this paper as [21]

    The paper’s main text says an international consensus group met and introduced MCAS diagnostic criteria, including a serum tryptase increase of 20% over baseline plus 2 ng/mL. It does not say the formula was put forth at a Working Conference or describe the group’s deliberations and shared practical experience. No page numbers are provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MCAS is diagnosed when there is documented recurrent episodic occurrence of typical systemic symptoms produced by mast cell mediators and involving at least two organ systems.

    “documented recurrent episodic occurrence of typical systemic symptoms that are produced by MC mediators and involve at least 2 organ systems”

    From Why the 20% + 2 Tryptase Formula Is a Diagnostic Gold Standard for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and Mast Cell Activation Syndrome (2019) · cites this paper as [21]

    The paper’s diagnostic-criteria passage identifies episodic mast-cell-related symptoms affecting two or more organ systems as the first criterion. It also requires a specified rise in serum tryptase and improvement with mast-cell-targeting treatment, so the symptoms alone do not establish an MCAS diagnosis. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • At the 2010 Working Conference, one issue discussed was the smallest rise in serum tryptase above baseline that would count as significant systemic mast cell activation and as a diagnostic marker of MCAS.

    “one of the deliberation points was the minimal increase in serum tryptase over the individual’s baseline that would meet the criterion of a significant systemic MC activation and would thus count as a diagnostic marker of MCAS [21].”

    From Why the 20% + 2 Tryptase Formula Is a Diagnostic Gold Standard for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and Mast Cell Activation Syndrome (2019) · cites this paper as [21]

    The main text (page unavailable) says a consensus group met to establish MCAS diagnostic criteria and identifies a serum tryptase rise of 20% above baseline plus 2 ng/mL as one criterion. It does not identify a 2010 Working Conference or say that determining the minimum rise was a specific deliberation point. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • According to consensus criteria for MCAS diagnosis, sAT should be greater than sBT -1.2 + 2 ng/mL to confirm MCAS.

    “According to the consensus criteria for the diagnosis of MCAS, sAT should be greater than sBT -1.2 þ 2 ng/mL to con fi rm the presence of MCAS.”

    From Selecting the Right Criteria and Proper Classification to Diagnose Mast Cell Activation Syndromes: A Critical Review (2021) · cites this paper as [42]

    The diagnostic-criteria passage [4] specifies an acute serum tryptase increase of 20% over baseline plus 2 ng/mL. The claim prints subtraction of 1.2 rather than multiplication by 1.2; moreover, the paper requires characteristic symptoms and a response to treatment as additional criteria, so the tryptase threshold alone does not confirm MCAS. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The 20% + 2 formula was put forward by a consensus group in 2012.

    “the 20% + 2 formula was proposed by the consensus group in 2012.”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Valent, P., Akin, C., Bonadonna, P., Hartmann, K., Broesby-Olsen, S., Brockow, K., Butterfield, J. H., Reiter, A., Gotlib, J., Castells, M., Milner, J. D., Carter, M. C., Komarow, H., Radia, D., Pardanani, A., Sotlar, K., Triggiani, M., Horny, H.-P., Arock, M., Schwartz, L. B., & Metcalfe, D. D.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona (IT)
  • University of Lübeck (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Stanford Cancer Institute (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Guy's Hospital (GB)
  • Paracelsus Medical University (AT)
  • University of Salerno (IT)
  • Pathologisches Institut (DE)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Corresponding author
Valent, Peter
Venue
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-09
Volume
142
Issue
3
Pages
1008-1010
ISSN
0091-6749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2809032396
Cited by
34
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • edoc (University of Basel) (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
  • Austrian Science Fund (#F4704-B20, F4701, F4701-B20)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
  • NHLBI Division of Intramural Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Mast cells and histamine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
Keywords
mast cell activation syndrome, mast cell activation, mast cell disease, diagnostic validity, overdiagnosis, referral centers, mast cell mediators
MeSH terms
Consensus Statements as Topic, Humans, Mast Cells, Mastocytosis, Consensus, Biomedical Research

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