↓ Skip to main content

Meta-analysis of the clinical and immunopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes in epidermolysis bullosa acquisita patients

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Meta-analysis of the clinical and immunopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes in epidermolysis bullosa acquisita patients
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13023-018-0896-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroaki Iwata, Artem Vorobyev, Hiroshi Koga, Andreas Recke, Detlef Zillikens, Catherine Prost-Squarcioni, Norito Ishii, Takashi Hashimoto, Ralf J. Ludwig

Abstract

Epidermolysis bullosa acquisita (EBA) is an orphan autoimmune disease. Several clinical phenotypes have been described, but subepidermal blistering is characteristic of all variants. Limited data on clinical and immunopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes in EBA are available. To fill this gap, we collected this information from EBA cases, meeting current diagnostic criteria, published between 1971 and 2016. We identified 1159 EBA cases. This number must be, however, interpreted with caution, as it is not possible to check for multiple reporting. The analysis of all cases indicated that EBA affects all age groups (median: 50 years, range: 1 to 94 years) at an equal gender distribution. Non-mechanobullous (non-MB) forms of EBA were observed in 55% of patients, whereas the mechanobullous variant (MB-EBA) or a combination of both variants was described in 38 or 7% of patients, respectively. Type VII collagen (COL7)-specific autoantibodies were primarily of the IgG isotype, but anti-COL7 IgA, IgM and IgE were also documented. Comparison of the 2 clinical EBA types showed a higher frequency of IgA deposits in non-MB EBA as opposed to MB EBA. Mucous membrane involvement was observed in 23% of patients, and 4.4% of cases were associated with other chronic inflammatory diseases. Of note, IgA deposits were more frequently observed in cases with mucous membrane involvement. Our analysis indicated that EBA is difficult to treat and that the choice of treatment varies widely. Chi square was applied to identify medications associated with complete remission (CR). Considering all EBA cases, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG, p = 0.0047) and rituximab (p = 0.0114) were associated with CR. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that no treatment was associated with CR for non-MB EBA, while IVIG (p = 0.003) was associated with CR in MB EBA. Within the limitations of the study, we here document the clinical and immunopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes in a large cohort of EBA patients. The observed associations of single drugs with treatment outcome may serve as a guide to develop clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 6 13%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 18 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 22 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2018.
All research outputs
#18,649,291
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#2,168
of 2,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,498
of 335,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#41
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,648 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.