The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Should we systematically test patients with clinically isolated syndrome for auto-antibodies?
Abstract
Background Several autoimmune diseases (ADs) can mimic multiple sclerosis (MS). For this reason, testing for auto-antibodies (auto-Abs) is often included in the diagnostic work-up of patients with a clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). Objective The purpose was to study how useful it was to systematically determine antinuclear-antibodies, anti-SSA and anti-SSB in a non-selected cohort of CIS patients, regarding the identification of other ADs that could represent an alternative diagnosis. Methods From a prospective CIS cohort, we selected 772 patients in which auto-Ab levels were tested within the first year from CIS. Baseline characteristics of auto-Ab positive and negative patients were compared. A retrospective revision of clinical records was then performed in the auto-Ab positive patients to identify those who developed ADs during follow-up. Results One or more auto-Ab were present in 29.4% of patients. Only 1.8% of patients developed other ADs during a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. In none of these cases the concurrent AD was considered the cause of the CIS. In all cases the diagnosis of the AD resulted from the development of signs and/or symptoms suggestive of each disease. Conclusion Antinuclear-antibodies, anti-SSA and anti-SSB should not be routinely determined in CIS patients but only in those presenting symptoms suggestive of other ADs.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Routine testing for systemic autoimmune diseases has a very low-yield in patients with presentations typical of MS.
“Routine testing for systemic autoimmune diseases has a very low-yield in patients with presentations typical of MS. 17”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [17]
Non-specific antibodies are frequently detected that may not be clinically relevant with low-titre antinuclear antibodies (ANA) particularly prevalent in patients with MS.
“Non-specific antibodies are frequently detected that may not be clinically relevant with low-titre antinuclear antibodies (ANA) particularly prevalent in patients with MS. 17”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [17]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- 10.1177/1352458508096878 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/ana.22366 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70572-5 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00415-012-6790-1 · DOI
- 10.1159/000343188 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00415-011-6240-5 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0065385 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2007.04.008 · DOI
- 10.1177/0961203311427550 · DOI
- 10.1177/135245859900500209 · DOI
- 10.1212/WNL.49.3.857 · DOI
- 10.1001/archneur.55.4.517 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-0404.2001.104002083.x · DOI
- 10.1177/1352458509355463 · DOI
- 10.1212/WNL.45.2.384 · DOI
- 10.1212/WNL.57.8.1359 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jns.2011.11.023 · DOI
- 10.1002/ana.81 · DOI
- 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182563b32 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/art.1780400909 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/jnnp.57.8.897 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1212/WNL.33.11.1444 · DOI · Paper page
- Tintoré M, 2000, Am J Neuroradiol, 21, 702
- 10.1212/WNL.38.3.371 · DOI
- 10.1002/art.34380 · DOI
- 10.1212/WNL.42.4.845 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2230.2001.00832.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s11926-013-0351-1 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.medcli.2008.12.027 · DOI
- 10.3748/wjg.v20.i5.1238 · DOI
- 10.1191/1352458504ms1087oa · DOI
- 10.1097/01.md.0000141099.53742.16 · DOI
- 10.1191/1352458503ms905oa · DOI
- 10.7326/0003-4819-104-3-323 · DOI
- 10.1093/qjmed/hcr218 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges
Brownlee, W. J., Hardy, T. A., Fazekas, F., & Miller, D. H. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30959-x · Cited by 701
Metadata
- Authors
- Negrotto, L., Tur, C., Tintoré, M., Arrambide, G., Sastre-Garriga, J., Río, J., Comabella, M., Nos, C., Galán, I., Vidal-Jordana, A., Simon, E., Castilló, J., Palavra, F., Mitjana, R., Auger, C., Rovira, À., & Montalban, X.
- Affiliations
- Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari (ES)
- Multiple Sclerosis Centre of Catalonia (Cemcat), Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Spain
- ORCID
- Venue
- Multiple Sclerosis Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-03-16
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1802-1810
- ISSN
- 1352-4585 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0970
- OpenAlex
- W2143641425
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Multiple Sclerosis Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Biogen
- Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
- IC Design Education Center
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Autoimmune Neurological Disorders and Treatments
- Keywords
- clinically isolated syndrome, autoantibodies, antinuclear antibodies, autoimmune disease, multiple sclerosis, differential diagnosis, diagnostic workup
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Antibodies, Antinuclear, Demyelinating Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Sex Factors
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