Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 305

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Retroperitoneal Fibrosis: A Clinicopathologic Study With Respect to Immunoglobulin G4

Zen, Yoh, Onodera, Manabu, Inoue, Dai, Kitao, Azusa, Matsui, Osamu, Nohara, Takahiro, Namiki, Mikio, Kasashima, Satomi, Kawashima, Atsuhiro, Matsumoto, Yasushi, Katayanagi, Kazuyoshi, Murata, Tetsuya, Ishizawa, Shin, Hosaka, Noriko, Kuriki, Ken, Nakanuma, Yasuni·2009·American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Abstract

The possible involvement of immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) in the pathogenesis of idiopathic sclerosing lesions has been suggested. In this study, a clinicopathologic analysis was performed to reveal characteristics of retroperitoneal fibrosis relating to IgG4. The study involved 17 patients with retroperitoneal fibrosis. Immunohistochemistry revealed numerous IgG4-positive plasma cell infiltrates in 10 cases (IgG4-related), but only a few positive cells in 7 cases (non-IgG4-related). All patients with IgG4-related retroperitoneal fibrosis were male, whereas all except 1 with unrelated lesions were female. Histologically, eosinophilic infiltration (>5 cells per high-power field) and obliterative phlebitis were commonly observed in IgG4-related lesions. Serologically, serum IgG and IgG4 concentrations were significantly higher in the IgG4-related cases, with the IgG4 concentrations all over 135 mg/dL (the upper limit of the normal range). Steroid therapy was performed in 13 cases, and was effective irrespective of IgG4. Three patients had recurrence during the follow up. Five of 10 IgG4-related cases had sclerosing lesions at other sites. The only tests that reliably distinguish the 2 groups were serum IgG4 levels or IgG4/IgG ratio in the plasma cells in a tissue biopsy. The only major clinical difference was the striking male predominance in IgG4-related cases. In conclusion, this study revealed that retroperitoneal fibrosis could be classified as IgG4-related or not. This distinction seems important to help better characterize the biology/pathogenesis of both groups and better predict the possibility of other IgG4-related processes at other anatomic sites.

Overview

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 · 10.1097/pas.0b013e3181b72882

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 305

Metadata

Authors
Zen, Y., Onodera, M., Inoue, D., Kitao, A., Matsui, O., Nohara, T., Namiki, M., Kasashima, S., Kawashima, A., Matsumoto, Y., Katayanagi, K., Murata, T., Ishizawa, S., Hosaka, N., Kuriki, K., & Nakanuma, Y.
Venue
American Journal of Surgical Pathology
Published
2009-12
Volume
33
Issue
12
Pages
1833-1839
ISSN
0147-5185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2002698787
Cited by
305
References
0
FWCI
16.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Retroperitoneal Fibrosis: A Clinicopathologic Study With Respect to Immunoglobulin G4. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/pas.0b013e3181b72882
The paper
Zen, Y., Onodera, M., Inoue, D., Kitao, A., Matsui, O., Nohara, T., Namiki, M., Kasashima, S., Kawashima, A., Matsumoto, Y., Katayanagi, K., Murata, T., Ishizawa, S., Hosaka, N., Kuriki, K., & Nakanuma, Y. (2009). Retroperitoneal Fibrosis: A Clinicopathologic Study With Respect to Immunoglobulin G4. American Journal of Surgical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0b013e3181b72882

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.