ArticleJAMA neurology2024
Multisite Skin Biopsies vs Cerebrospinal Fluid for Prion Seeding Activity in the Diagnosis of Prion Diseases.
Article in JAMA neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comprehensive Characterization of 98 Chinese Cases of Genetic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease With T188K Mutation.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- A noninvasive test for human prion disease using hair roots and scalp.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Oral Administrations of Short-Chain Fatty Acids or Probiotics Extend the Survival Times and Mitigate the Neuropathological Damages in the Scrapie-Infected Hamsters.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Article
- Skin biopsy: an emerging tool for the diagnosis of protein misfolding diseases of the central nervous system.Molecular neurodegeneration · 2025Article
- Advancing Prion Diagnostics: RT-QuIC Applications in Peripheral Tissues.Sub-cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- Tracking Prions by RT-QuIC: An Update.Sub-cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- Bridging prion biology and Alzheimer's disease: from pathogenic seeds to precision therapeutics.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Recent studies have revealed that autopsy skin samples from cadavers with prion diseases (PRDs) exhibited a positive prion seeding activity similar to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). It is worthwhile to validate the findings with a large number of biopsy skin samples and compare the clinical value of prion seeding activity between skin biopsies and concurrent CSF specimens. Objective: To compare the prion seeding activity of skin biopsies and CSF samples and to determine the effectiveness of combination of the skin biopsies from multiple sites and numerous dilutions on the diagnosis for various types of PRDs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In the exploratory cohort, patients were enrolled from September 15, 2021, to December 15, 2023, and were followed up every 3 months until April 2024. The confirmatory cohort enrolled patients from December 16, 2023, to June 31, 2024. The exploratory cohort was conducted at a single center, the neurology department at Xuanwu Hospital. The confirmatory cohort was a multicenter study involving 4 hospitals in China. Participants included those diagnosed with probable sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease or genetically confirmed PRDs. Patients with uncertain diagnoses or those lost to follow-up were excluded. All patients with PRDs underwent skin sampling at 3 sites (the near-ear area, upper arm, lower back, and inner thigh), and a portion of them had CSF samples taken simultaneously. In the confirmatory cohort, a single skin biopsy site and CSF samples were simultaneously collected from a portion of patients with PRDs. Exposures: The skin and CSF prion seeding activity was assessed using the real-time quaking-induced conversion (RT-QUIC) assay, with rHaPrP90-231, a Syrian hamster recombinant prion protein, as the substrate. In the exploratory cohort, skin samples were tested at dilutions of 10-2 through 10-4. In the confirmatory cohort, skin samples were tested at a dilution of 10-2. A total of four 15-μL wells of CSF were used in the RT-QUIC assay. Main Outcomes and Measures: Correlations between RT-QUIC results from the skin and CSF and the final diagnosis of enrolled patients. Results: In the exploratory cohort, the study included 101 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.9 [10.2] years; 63 female [62.4%]) with PRD and 23 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.4 [9.1] years; 13 female [56.5%]) without PRD. A total of 94 patients had CSF samples taken simultaneously with the skin biopsy samples. In the confirmatory cohort, a single skin biopsy site and CSF sample were taken simultaneously in 43 patients with PRDs. Using an experimental condition of 10-2 dilution, the RT-QUIC positive rates of skin samples from different sites were comparable with those of the CSF (skin: 18 of 26 [69.2%] to 74 of 93 [79.6%] vs CSF: 71 of 94 [75.5%]). When tested at 3 different dilutions, all skin sample positivity rates increased to over 80.0% (79 of 93 for the near-ear area, 21 of 26 for the upper arm, 77 of 92 for the lower back, and 78 of 92 for the inner thigh). Combining samples from skin sites near the ear, inner thigh, and lower back in pairs yielded positivity rates exceeding 92.1% (93 of 101), significantly higher than CSF alone (71 of 94 [75.5%]; P =.002). When all skin sample sites were combined and tested at 3 dilution concentrations for RT-QUIC, the sensitivity reached 95.0% (96 of 101). In the confirmatory cohort, the RT-QUIC positive rate of a single skin biopsy sample was slightly higher than that of the CSF (34 of 43 [79.1%] vs 31 of 43 [72.1%]; P = .45). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this diagnostic study suggest that the sensitivity of an RT-QUIC analysis of a combination of 2 or more skin sites was superior to that of CSF in diagnosing PRDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.