European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2012
Human epididymis protein 4 for differential diagnosis between benign gynecologic disease and ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Lin JiaYing, Qin JinBao, Sangvatanakul Voramon
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a new biomarker for the detection of ovarian cancer. The objective of this review was to assess by meta-analysis the overall diagnostic accuracy of HE4 assay in differentiating malignant ovarian tumors from benign gynecology diseases.
STUDY DESIGN: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published up to June 2012 that evaluated HE4 accuracy. Meta-analysis was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, the positive likelihood ratio (PLR), the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and the area under curve (AUC).
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies with 3395 patients who fulfilled all inclusion criteria were considered in the analysis. No publication bias was found. HE4 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-0.76) and a pooled specificity of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.89). Overall, the positive likelihood ratio was 8.04 (95% CI, 4.89-13.21) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.22-0.34). When HE4 was combined with CA125, the sensitivity was higher than that of HE4 alone at the expense of lower specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of serum HE4 is a useful method for differential diagnosis between benign gynecologic disease and ovarian cancer.
STUDY DESIGN: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published up to June 2012 that evaluated HE4 accuracy. Meta-analysis was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, the positive likelihood ratio (PLR), the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and the area under curve (AUC).
RESULTS: A total of 11 studies with 3395 patients who fulfilled all inclusion criteria were considered in the analysis. No publication bias was found. HE4 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-0.76) and a pooled specificity of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.89). Overall, the positive likelihood ratio was 8.04 (95% CI, 4.89-13.21) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.22-0.34). When HE4 was combined with CA125, the sensitivity was higher than that of HE4 alone at the expense of lower specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of serum HE4 is a useful method for differential diagnosis between benign gynecologic disease and ovarian cancer.