Responses

Download PDFPDF
EULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research group statement and recommendations on endothelial precursor cells
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    • Oliver Distler
    • Other Contributors:
      • Jörg H.W. Distler, Yannick Allanore, Jerome Avouac, Marco Mattucci-Cerinic

    Dear Editor,

    We thank Dres Arends and Fadini and their coworkers for their interest in our article and for their comments.

    In general, the EUSTAR recommendations are guidelines for research in an evolving field. We fully agree with the statements by Dres Arends and Fadini that these recommendations should not be considered as a final and definite, but should rather be seen as a first attempt to reach conse...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    EUSTAR’s statement and recommendations on endothelial precursor cells – putting things into perspect

    Dear Editor,

    The European League Against Rheumatism Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) group provided recommendations for standardization of future research on endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs)[1]. We support this initiative, as the use of different protocols by different study groups in EPC research hampers substantial advancement in this field. However, we feel that some of the statements made by the EUSTAR gr...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Sharing recommendations for endothelial progenitor cell analyses

    Dear Editor,

    We appreciated the efforts by the EUSTAR committee to provide recommendations for endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) analyses. We agree that EPC methods should be uniformed, as considerable disagreement exist that is likely to limit research advancement.[1] However, the piece contains some statements that might lead to a misinterpretation of future data on EPC analyses. These aspects have been previousl...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.