Cited by 17

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Antimitochondrial Rather than Antinuclear Antibodies Correlate with Severe Drug-Induced Liver Injury

Weber, Sabine, Benesic, Andreas, Buchholtz, Marie-Luise, Rotter, Isabelle, Gerbes, Alexander L.·2021·Digestive Diseases

Abstract

Introduction: A proportion of patients with drug-induced liver injury (DILI) present with autoantibodies, which has led to the current concept of autoimmune-like DILI. However, no standardized definition exists and the clinical relevance has not been studied in detail yet. Methods: 143 patients with DILI enrolled in a prospective study were analyzed. DILI diagnosis was based on the monocyte-derived hepatocyte-like cell test and supported by Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) and expert adjudication. Testing for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and antimitochondrial antibodies (AMA) was performed using immunofluorescence. ANA titers ≥1:100 were considered positive and ≥1:400 clinically relevant; AMA positivity was considered at titers ≥1:100. Results: 67% exhibited ANA ≥1:100 and 29% ANA ≥1:400; 10% were AMA positive. There was no significant correlation between the ANA titers and the causative drug, while AMA positive patients had taken nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs more frequently. No difference was seen regarding clinical characteristics or laboratory parameters in patients with ANA ≥1:400, while patients with positive AMA presented with higher aminotransferases, bilirubin, and international normalized ratio. Significantly higher proportions of patients with ANA ≥1:400 or AMA positivity exhibited elevated immunoglobulin G levels. AMA positivity but not elevated ANA titers correlated with a higher proportion of Hy’s law positivity. Conclusion: A closer look in a causality proven DILI cohort provided no evidence that presence of ANA titers is specific for DILI by a certain medication. AMA rather than ANA positivity was related to a more pronounced liver injury.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000511635

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.02.050 · DOI
  2. 10.7326/0003-4819-137-12-200212170-00007 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1053/jhep.2002.34857 · DOI
  4. 10.4254/wjh.v6.i4.160 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.02.024 · DOI
  6. 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313369 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1055/s-0034-1375959 · DOI
  8. 10.3389/fphar.2019.01235 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/hep.27157 · DOI
  10. 10.1097/SMJ.0000000000000059 · DOI
  11. 10.4081/cp.2012.e83 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.jhep.2010.12.041 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.3109/15476910903501748 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.jhep.2007.05.011 · DOI
  15. 10.1038/clpt.2011.58 · DOI
  16. 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309528 · DOI
  17. 10.1038/labinvest.2012.64 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.04.049 · DOI
  19. 10.1097/MOG.0000000000000526 · DOI
  20. 10.3390/ijms17020201 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/hep.20703 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/s0168-8278(99)80297-9 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.05.043 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1097/FPC.0000000000000230 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1043/0003-9985(2000)124%3c0071:GFCUOT%3e2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  26. 10.1002/1529-0131(199709)40:9%3c1601::AID-ART9%3e3.0.CO;2-T · DOI
  27. 10.1002/art.30084 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.cyto.2016.07.010 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/hep.26678 · DOI
  30. 10.1136/gut.2007.122150 · DOI
  31. 10.3748/wjg.v22.i33.7579 · DOI
  32. 10.1097/meg.0b013e3283089392 · DOI
  33. 10.1097/MPG.0000000000001363 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Weber, S., Benesic, A., Buchholtz, M.-L., Rotter, I., & Gerbes, A. L.
Venue
Digestive Diseases
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2020-09-17
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
275-282
ISSN
  • 0257-2753
  • 1421-9875
Cited by
17
References
0
Language
en

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