Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018
Serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia and other IgM monoclonal gammopathies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zou Hong, Yang Rong, Liao Zhong-Xian, Qin Tian-di, Chen Ping, Zhang Bei-Ying, Cao Ying-Ping, Huang Hui-Fang
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: IgM monoclonal gammopathy can be present in a broad spectrum of diseases. We evaluated the value of serum markers in the differential diagnosis of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) and other types of IgM monoclonal gammopathies.
METHODS: We included patients who were first admitted to hospital and identified as having IgM monoclonal gammopathy by serum immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFE). We evaluated basic clinical features, sIFE, diagnosis, and serum markers. Furthermore, we applied the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of serum markers for WM. Finally, we used logistic regression and ROC curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of multimarker combinations to identify WM.
RESULTS: IgM monoclonal gammopathy was most frequently found in patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, followed by monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (B-NHL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Serum markers showed significant differences among the four diseases. The diagnostic markers LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and serum light chain К had higher diagnostic efficiency. Among these markers, serum IgM provided the highest diagnostic efficiency. Additionally, the combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: The five serum markers, LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and К, each yielded a specific efficacy in differential diagnosis of WM. The single marker with the highest diagnostic efficiency was the serum IgM level. However, a combination of multiple serum markers was better than the use of a single marker in diagnosing WM. The combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis, with an AUC of .952 and sensitivity and specificity of 87.8% and 86.9%, respectively.
METHODS: We included patients who were first admitted to hospital and identified as having IgM monoclonal gammopathy by serum immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFE). We evaluated basic clinical features, sIFE, diagnosis, and serum markers. Furthermore, we applied the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of serum markers for WM. Finally, we used logistic regression and ROC curve to analyze the differential diagnosis value of multimarker combinations to identify WM.
RESULTS: IgM monoclonal gammopathy was most frequently found in patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, followed by monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (B-NHL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Serum markers showed significant differences among the four diseases. The diagnostic markers LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and serum light chain К had higher diagnostic efficiency. Among these markers, serum IgM provided the highest diagnostic efficiency. Additionally, the combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: The five serum markers, LDH, IgM, IgG, IgA, and К, each yielded a specific efficacy in differential diagnosis of WM. The single marker with the highest diagnostic efficiency was the serum IgM level. However, a combination of multiple serum markers was better than the use of a single marker in diagnosing WM. The combined use of all five serum markers provided the most effective diagnosis, with an AUC of .952 and sensitivity and specificity of 87.8% and 86.9%, respectively.