Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024
Diagnostic values, association with disease activity and possible risk factors of anti-PAD4 in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis.
МетаанализСтатьяНазвание 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.
Zhang Guangyue, Xu Jiayi, Du Dongru, Liu Yi, Dai Lunzhi, Zhao Yi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Anti-peptidyl arginine deaminase 4 (anti-PAD4) antibody has been a subject of investigation in RA in the last two decades. This meta-analysis investigated the diagnostic values, association with disease activity and possible risk factors of anti-PAD4 antibody in rheumatoid arthritis.
METHOD: We searched studies from five databases up to 1 December 2022. Bivariate mixed-effect models were used to pool the diagnostic accuracy indexes, and the summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) curve was plotted. The quality of diagnostic studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. Non-diagnostic meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, subgroup analyses and Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test were used to address heterogeneity.
RESULT: Finally, 24 journal articles and one letter were included. Anti-PAD4 antibody had a good diagnostic value between RA and healthy individuals, but it might be lower between RA and other rheumatic diseases. Moreover, anti-PAD4 could slightly enhance RA diagnostic sensitivity with a combination of ACPA or ACPA/RF. Anti-PAD4 antibody was positively correlated with HLA-SE and negatively correlated with ever or current smoking in patients with RA. RA patients with anti-PAD4 antibody had higher DAS28, ESR, swollen joint count (SJC) and the possibility of having interstitial lung disease (ILD) and pulmonary fibrosis compared with those without.
CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that anti-PAD4 antibody is a potentially useful diagnostic biomarker and clinical indicator for RA. Further mechanistic studies are required to understand the impact of HLA-SE and smoking on the production of anti-PAD4 antibody.
METHOD: We searched studies from five databases up to 1 December 2022. Bivariate mixed-effect models were used to pool the diagnostic accuracy indexes, and the summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) curve was plotted. The quality of diagnostic studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. Non-diagnostic meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. Sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, subgroup analyses and Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test were used to address heterogeneity.
RESULT: Finally, 24 journal articles and one letter were included. Anti-PAD4 antibody had a good diagnostic value between RA and healthy individuals, but it might be lower between RA and other rheumatic diseases. Moreover, anti-PAD4 could slightly enhance RA diagnostic sensitivity with a combination of ACPA or ACPA/RF. Anti-PAD4 antibody was positively correlated with HLA-SE and negatively correlated with ever or current smoking in patients with RA. RA patients with anti-PAD4 antibody had higher DAS28, ESR, swollen joint count (SJC) and the possibility of having interstitial lung disease (ILD) and pulmonary fibrosis compared with those without.
CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that anti-PAD4 antibody is a potentially useful diagnostic biomarker and clinical indicator for RA. Further mechanistic studies are required to understand the impact of HLA-SE and smoking on the production of anti-PAD4 antibody.