Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of miRNAs in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
It is reported that miRNAs are aberrantly expressed in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, the diagnostic value of miRNAs in pancreatic cancer remains controversial. The meta-analysis was to access diagnostic accuracy of miRNAs in pancreatic cancer.Methods
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WANFANG Data, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and VIP databases were retrieved up to June 30, 2016, to collect articles concerning the diagnosis of miRNAs in pancreatic cancer. The methodological quality of each study was assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). This meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan5.0, MetaDiSc 1.4, and Stata 12.0 software.Results
There are 40 articles including 109 studies. The pooled SEN was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.80-0.82), the pooled SPE was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77-0.79), the pooled +LR was 3.32 (95% CI, 2.92-3.80), the pooled -LR was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.24-0.31), the pooled DOR was 14.56 (95% CI, 11.55-18.34), and pooled AUC was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.84-0.88).Discussion
This meta-analysis demonstrated that miRNA makes a significant impact in the pancreatic cancer diagnosis with a high SEN and SPE, particularly using multiple miRNAs.
SUBMITTER: Sun X
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5977035 | biostudies-literature | 2018
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of miRNAs in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer.
Sun Xiao X Zhou Xiaobin X Zhang Yuan Y Zhu Xiaoyan X Liu Haihua H
Disease markers 20180515
<h4>Background</h4>It is reported that miRNAs are aberrantly expressed in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, the diagnostic value of miRNAs in pancreatic cancer remains controversial. The meta-analysis was to access diagnostic accuracy of miRNAs in pancreatic cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WANFANG Data, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and VIP databases were retrieved up to June 30, 2016, to collect artic ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a 5-year survival rate below 5%. Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) is the most commonly used blood-based biomarker for PDAC in current clinical practice, despite having been shown repeatedly to be inaccurate and have poor diagnostic performance. This review aims to assess the reported diagnostic accuracy of all blood-based biomarkers investigated to date in PDAC, by directly comparing individual biomarkers and multi-biomarker panels, both containing CA19-9 and not (novel). A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA standards in July 2020. Individualized search strategies for three academic databases identified 5,885 studies between the years 1973 and 2020. After two rounds of screening, 250 studies were included. Data were extracted and assessed for bias. A multivariate three-level meta-analysis with subgroup moderators was run in R using AUC values as effect size. On the basis of this model, the pooled AUC value for all multi-biomarker panels (AUC = 0.898; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-0.91) was significantly higher than all single biomarkers (AUC = 0.803; 95% CI: 0.78-0.83; P < 0.0001). The pooled AUC value for CA19-9 alone was significantly lower compared with the multi-biomarker panels containing CA19-9 (P < 0.0001). For the novel biomarkers, the pooled AUC for single biomarkers was also significantly lower compared with multi-biomarker panels (P < 0.0001). Novel biomarkers that have been repeatedly examined across the literature, such as TIMP-1, CEA, and CA125, are highlighted as promising. These results suggest that CA19-9 may be best used as an addition to a panel of biomarkers rather than alone, and that multi-biomarker panels generate the most robust results in blood-based PDAC diagnosis.SignificanceIn a systematic review and three-level multivariate meta-analysis, it is shown for the first time that blood-based multi-biomarker panels for the diagnosis of PDAC exhibit superior performance in comparison with single biomarkers. CA19-9 is demonstrated to have limited utility alone, and to perform poorly in patient control cohorts of both healthy and benign individuals. Multi-biomarker panels containing CA19-9 produce the best diagnostic performance overall.
| S-EPMC10035398 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Increasing evidence from recent studies has revealed the association of CA125 with the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, but inconsistent findings have been reported. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of a serum CA125-based diagnostic panel in predicting malignant pancreatic cancer. Materials and Methods: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science for relevant articles from inception to October 2016. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. The performance characteristics were pooled using random-effects models. The statistical analysis was performed using Meta-Disc 1.4 and Stata Version 12.0 software. Results: A total of 1235 participants pooled from 8 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of tumor predictors for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The pooling accuracy analysis of CA125 alone indicated that the pooled sensitivity was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.54-0.62) and the specificity was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75-0.82), whereas the serum CA125-based diagnostic panel had a pooled sensitivity of 0.47 (95% CI 0.47-0.51) and a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.86-0.90). Furthermore, the AUC and Q-value of the CA125-based diagnostic panel were 0.89 and 0.82, respectively, which indicated that the CA125-based panel is superior to CA125 or CA19-9 alone in diagnosing pancreatic cancer. No obvious publication bias was found. Conclusions: In summary, a CA125-based diagnostic panel is better at diagnosing pancreatic cancer than a test using CA125 or CA19-9 alone. Further studies should be performed to confirm our conclusion.
| S-EPMC5687178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCirculating tumor cells (CTCs) detection has previously been used for diagnosing gastric cancer. However, the previous studies failed to make an agreement whether the detection of CTCs contributes to the diagnosis of gastric cancer.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the overall accuracy of CTCs detection for diagnosing gastric cancer. PubMed, Embase and the Wanfang database were searched in all languages published up to Oct 2012. The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR, respectively), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve were calculated to evaluate the overall test performance.ResultsTwenty studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The diagnostic value of CTCs detection for the gastric cancer was calculated to evaluate the overall test performance. The summary estimates of The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio were 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21-0.67), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.00), 58.2 (95% CI, 9.8-345.9), 0.58 (95% CI, 0.38-0.89), and 100 (95% CI, 15-663), respectively. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98). Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test found no evidence of study publication bias in the current study (P = 0.49).ConclusionThis systematic review suggests that CTCs detection alone cannot be recommended as a screening test for gastric cancer. However, it might be used as a noninvasive method for the confirmation of the gastric cancer diagnosis.
| S-EPMC3699416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study sought to systematically analyze the clinical diagnostic value of tumor markers combined with ThinPrep cytologic test (TCT) and human papillomavirus (HPV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) detection for cervical cancer and pre-cancerous lesions. However, there is a lot of controversy in the field of TCT + HPV-DNA. Many people have mixed opinions on the accuracy of TCT + HPV-DNA, and there is no unified opinion. Therefore, it is necessary to further confirm the significance of this combined detection method in the early diagnosis of cervical cancer by applying meta method.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) databases were searched to retrieve studies. To assess the methodological quality of each study and potential risk of bias, QUADAS-2 Guidelines were used to evaluate the quality of all articles that met the inclusion criteria and data extraction of the included articles were performed, and a meta-analysis was performed of the included studies using Review Manager 5.2 software.ResultsA total of 5 studies were included in the study, and a total of 2,778 patients were included in the study, and there was no significant publication bias observed. The meta-analysis showed that there was a statistical difference in terms of the accuracy of the tumor markers combined with TCT in the detection of cervical cancer. The results were as follows: the pooled sensitivity (SEN) was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.75-0.93); the combined specificity (SPE) was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.57-0.92); the diagnostic performance of combined with thin-layer liquid-based cytology and HPV DNA detection in the diagnosis accuracy of cervical cancer by summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analysis, result showed excellent diagnostic accuracy, with a combined area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.92).DiscussionTumor markers are important for the early diagnosis of cervical cancer. Combining the tumor markers with TCT and HPV DNA detection effectively improved the detection rate.
| S-EPMC9372687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHaving a penicillin allergy label associates with a higher risk for antibiotic resistance and increased health care use.ObjectiveWe sought to assess the accuracy of skin tests and specific IgE quantification in the diagnostic evaluation of patients reporting a penicillin/β-lactam allergy.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis, searching on MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. We included studies conducted in patients reporting a penicillin allergy and in whom skin tests and/or specific IgE quantification were performed and compared with drug challenge results. We quantitatively assessed the accuracy of diagnostic tests with bivariate random-effects meta-analyses. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore causes of heterogeneity. Studies' quality was evaluated using QUADAS-2 criteria.ResultsWe included 105 primary studies, assessing 31,761 participants. Twenty-seven studies were assessed by bivariate meta-analysis. Skin tests had a summary sensitivity of 30.7% (95% CI, 18.9%-45.9%) and a specificity of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.2%-98.3%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.686 (I2 = 38.2%). Similar results were observed for subanalyses restricted to patients reporting nonimmediate maculopapular exanthema or urticaria/angioedema. Specific IgE had a summary sensitivity of 19.3% (95% CI, 12.0%-29.4%) and a specificity of 97.4% (95% CI, 95.2%-98.6%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.420 (I2 = 8.5%). Projected predictive values mainly reflect the low frequency of true penicillin allergy.ConclusionsSkin tests and specific IgE quantification appear to have low sensitivity and high specificity. Because current evidence is insufficient for assessing the role of these tests in stratifying patients for delabeling, we identified key requirements needed for future studies.
| S-EPMC8019189 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Comorbid depression is common among patients with diabetes and has severe health consequences, but often remains unrecognized. Several questionnaires are used to screen for depression. A systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires in adults with diabetes is unavailable. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS:PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 28 February 2018. Studies were included when the diagnostic accuracy of depression questionnaires was assessed in a diabetes population and the reference standard was a clinical interview. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and checked by another. Two reviewers independently conducted the quality assessment (QUADAS-2). Diagnostic accuracy was pooled in bivariate random effects models. The main outcome was diagnostic accuracy, expressed as sensitivity and specificity, of depression questionnaires in an adult diabetes population. This study is reported according to PRISMA-DTA and is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018092950). RESULTS:A total 6,097 peer-reviewed articles were screened. Twenty-one studies (N = 5,703 patients) met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Twelve different depression questionnaires were identified, of which the CES-D (n = 6 studies) and PHQ-9 (n = 7 studies) were the most frequently evaluated. Risk of bias was unclear for multiple domains in the majority of studies. In the meta-analyses, five (N = 1,228) studies of the CES-D (?16), five (N = 1,642) of the PHQ-9 (?10) and four (N = 822) of the algorithm of the PHQ-9 were included in the pooled analysis. The CES-D (?16) had a pooled sensitivity of 85.0% (95%CI, 71.3-92.8%) and a specificity of 71.6% (95%CI, 62.5-79.2%); the PHQ-9 (?10) had a sensitivity of 81.5% (95%CI, 57.1-93.5%) and a specificity of 79.7% (95%CI, 62.1-90.4%). The algorithm for the PHQ-9 had a sensitivity of 60.9% (95%CI, 52.3-90.8%) and a specificity of 64.0% (95%CI, 53.0-93.9%). CONCLUSIONS:This review indicates that the CES-D had the highest sensitivity, whereas the PHQ-9 had the highest specificity, although confidence intervals were wide and overlapping. The algorithm for the PHQ-9 had the lowest sensitivity and specificity. Given the variance in results and suboptimal reporting of studies, further high quality studies are needed to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of these depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes.
| S-EPMC6586329 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesUltrasound (US) technology has recently made advances that have led to the development of modalities including elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The use of different US modalities in combination may increase the accuracy of PCa diagnosis. This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric ultrasound (mpUS) in the PCa diagnosis.MethodsThrough September 2023, we searched through Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov, and Google Scholar for relevant studies. We used standard methods recommended for meta-analyses of diagnostic evaluation. We plot the SROC curve, which stands for summary receiver operating characteristic. To determine how confounding factors affected the results, meta-regression analysis was used.ResultsFinally, 1004 patients from 8 studies that were included in this research were examined. The diagnostic odds ratio for PCa was 20 (95% confidence interval (CI), 8-49) and the pooled estimates of mpUS for diagnosis were as follows: sensitivity, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.81-0.93); specificity, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.59-0.83); positive predictive value, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.63-0.87); and negative predictive value, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.71-0.93). The area under the SROC curve was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86-0.92). There was a significant heterogeneity among the studies (p < 0.01). According to meta-regression, both the sensitivity and specificity of mpUS in the diagnosis of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) were inferior to any PCa.ConclusionThe diagnostic accuracy of mpUS in the diagnosis of PCa is moderate, but the accuracy in the diagnosis of csPCa is significantly lower than any PCa. More relevant research is needed in the future.Critical relevance statementThis study provides urologists and sonographers with useful data by summarizing the accuracy of multiparametric ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer.Key points• Recent studies focused on the role of multiparametric ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. • This meta-analysis revealed that multiparametric ultrasound has moderate diagnostic accuracy for prostate cancer. • The diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric ultrasound in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer is significantly lower than any prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC10673798 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Galectins constitute a family of ?-galactoside-binding proteins, which influence various hallmarks of pancreatic cancer, including cell proliferation, invasion and migration; immune escape; and angiogenesis. Although many studies have concentrated on the role of galectins in pancreatic cancer, the results remain controversial. Hence, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to clarify the precise diagnostic and prognostic value of galectins in pancreatic cancer. Methods:PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were used to search related published literature up to July 2019. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs), diagnostic accuracy variables and related 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using STATA 14.0 software. Results:Eleven studies including 1227 participants met our inclusion criteria. High expression of galectin family was not correlated with overall survival (OS) in pancreatic cancer (HR, 1.19; 95% CI 0.67-2.11). According to subgroup analysis, high levels of galectin-1 were significantly correlated with worse OS in pancreatic cancer (HR, 4.77; 95% CI 2.47-9.21), while high levels of tandem-repeat galectins (galectin-4 or galectin-9) predicted both better OS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI 0.46-0.86) and disease-free survival (DFS) (HR, 0.63; 95% CI 0.48-0.83). The expression levels of galectin-3 did not directly correlate with prognosis (HR, 0.99; 95% CI 0.40-2.46). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratios of galectin-3 were 0.64 (95% CI 0.41-0.82), 0.76 (95% CI 0.59-0.88), 2.70 (95% CI 1.21-6.1), and 0.47 (95% CI 0.23-0.98), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of galectin-3 was 0.77. Conclusion:Taken together, our results suggest that high expression of galectin-1 and low levels of galectin-4 or galectin-9 are predictors of worse prognosis in pancreatic cancer patients. The expression of galectin-3 was not directly related to OS and other clinical characteristics. Although galectin-3 exhibited some diagnostic value in patients with pancreatic cancer in this meta-analysis, clinical application prospects remain to be validated. Further studies are warranted to confirm and strengthen these findings.
| S-EPMC6873495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aim:To assess the diagnostic performance of lateral radiograph of the neck for supraglottitis in adults and children. Methods:Electronic database searches (including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were carried out through July 2014. Citations of included studies and recent narrative reviews were searched. Studies that compared lateral radiograph of the neck with a reference standard of direct/indirect laryngoscopy were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of included studies by Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Results:Of 2,088 potentially relevant citations, two single-gate (cohort) studies and six two-gate (case-control) studies were identified. These included studies of design are at the moderate or high risk of bias in QUADAS-2. The pooled sensitivity from bivariate random-effects regression was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.5-95.9%) and the pooled specificity was 89.2% (95% CI, 85.9-91.9%), but the diagnostic value would be overestimated because of selection bias in the six two-gate studies. The sensitivity and specificity of the single-gate studies were 100.0% (95% CI, 92.2-100.0%) and 30.6% (95% CI, 15.5-35.6%) in children and 81.0% (95% CI, 78.2-93.2%) and 85.7% specificity (95% CI, 78.2-93.2%) in adults. Conclusion:This study determines that there are insufficient studies of lateral neck radiograph for detecting supraglottitis. Lateral radiograph of the neck seems to have moderate accuracy for detecting supraglottitis. Further approximately unbiased studies are needed to obtain more valid and reliable estimates of test accuracy.
| S-EPMC5667265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset.Results5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%).ConclusionHigher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42020179452.
| S-EPMC7327913 | biostudies-literature