4.5 Article

The European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) Registry Working Definitions for the Clinical Diagnosis of Inborn Errors of Immunity

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.02.004

关键词

Primary immunodeficiency (PID); Primary immune deficiency and immune dysregulation disorder (PIDD); Guideline; Diagnostic algorithm; Classification; Consensus; Registry; Epidemiology

资金

  1. PPTA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patient 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. (C) 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据