1,720,965 research outputs found
The European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) registry 2014
Full text linkEuropean Society for Immunodeficiencies Registr
Inborn errors of immunity: Manifestation, treatment, and outcome-an ESID registry 1994-2024 report on 30,628 patients
No full textThe European Society for Immunodeficiencies patient registry (ESID-R), established in 1994, is one of the world's largest databases on inborn errors of immunity (IEI). IEI are genetic disorders predisposing patients to infections, autoimmunity, inflammation, allergies, and malignancies. Treatments include antimicrobial therapy, immunoglobulin replacement, immune modulation, stem cell transplantation, and gene therapy. Data from 194 centers in 33 countries capture clinical manifestations and treatments from birth onward, with annually expected updates. This report reviews the ESID-R's structure, data content, and impact. The registry includes 30,628 patient datasets (aged 0-97.9 years; median follow-up: 7.2 years; total 825,568.2 patient-years), with 13,550 cases in 15 sub-studies. It has produced 84 peer-reviewed publications (mean citation rate: 95). Findings include real-world observations of IEI diagnoses, genetic causes, clinical manifestations, treatments, and survival trends. The ESID-R fosters global collaboration, advancing IEI research and patient care. This report highlights the key role of the multinational ESID-R, led by an independent medical society, in evidence-based discovery
The European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) Registry Working Definitions for the Clinical Diagnosis of Inborn Errors of Immunity
No full textPatient registries are instrumental for clinical research in rare diseases. They help to achieve a sufficient sample size for epidemiological and clinical research and to assess the feasibility of clinical trials. The European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) registry currently comprises information on more than 25,000 patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI). The prerequisite of a patient to be included into the ESID registry is an IEI either defined by a defect in a gene included in the disease classification of the international union of immunological societies, or verified by applying clinical criteria. Because a relevant number of patients, including those with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), representing the largest group of patients in the registry, remain without a genetic diagnosis, consensus on classification of these patients is mandatory. Here, we present clinical criteria for a large number of IEI that were designed in expert panels with an external review. They were implemented for novel entries and verification of existing data sets from 2014, yielding a substantial refinement. For instance, 8% of adults and 27% of children with CVID (176 of 1704 patients) were reclassified to 22 different immunodeficiencies, illustrating progress in genetics, but also the previous lack of standardized disease definitions. Importantly, apart from registry purposes, the clinical criteria are also helpful to support treatment decisions in the absence of a genetic diagnosis or in patients with variants of unknown significance
Modeling Primary Immunodeficiency Disease Epidemiology and Its Treatment to Estimate Latent Therapeutic Demand for Immunoglobulin
No full textThe European internet-based patient and research database for primary immunodeficiencies: update 2011
No full text
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
