首页> 外文期刊>BMC Cancer >Does risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm excel human epididymis protein 4 and ca125 in predicting epithelial ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis
【24h】

Does risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm excel human epididymis protein 4 and ca125 in predicting epithelial ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis

机译:卵巢恶性算法的风险在预测上皮性卵巢癌方面胜过人类附睾蛋白4和ca125吗?

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Backgrounds Risk for Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) and Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) appear to be promising predictors for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), however, conflicting results exist in the diagnostic performance comparison among ROMA, HE4 and CA125. Methods Remote databases (MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov) and full texts bibliography were searched for relevant s. All studies included were closely assessed with the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2). EOC predictive value of ROMA was systematically evaluated, and comparison among the predictive performances of ROMA, HE4 and CA125 were conducted within the same population. Sensitivity, specificity, DOR (diagnostic odds ratio), LR?±?(positive and negative likelihood ratio) and AUC (area under receiver operating characteristic-curve) were summarized with a bivariate model. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the heterogeneity. Results Data of 7792 tests were retrieved from 11 studies. The overall estimates of ROMA for EOC predicting were: sensitivity (0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.93), specificity (0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.88), and AUC (0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95). Comparison of EOC predictive value between HE4 and CA125 found, specificity: HE4 (0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.96)?>?CA125 (0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.90); AUC: CA125 (0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.91)?>?HE4 (0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.85). Comparison of OC predictive value between HE4 and CA125 found, AUC: CA125 (0.89, 95% CI 0.85-0.91)?>?HE4 (0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.83). Comparison among the three tests for EOC prediction found, sensitivity: ROMA (0.86, 95%CI 0.81-0.91)?>?HE4 (0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.85); specificity: HE4 (0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.96)?>?ROMA (0.84, 95% CI 0.79-0.88)?>?CA125 (0.78, 95%CI 0.73-0.83). Conclusions ROMA is helpful for distinguishing epithelial ovarian cancer from benign pelvic mass. HE4 is not better than CA125 either for EOC or OC prediction. ROMA is promising predictors of epithelial ovarian cancer to replace CA125, but its utilization requires further exploration.
机译:背景技术卵巢恶性算法(ROMA)和人附睾蛋白4(HE4)的风险似乎是上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)的有前途的预测因素,但是,ROMA,HE4和CA125的诊断性能比较中存在矛盾的结果。方法检索远程数据库(MEDLINE / PUBMED,EMBASE,Web of Science,Google Scholar,Cochrane图书馆和ClinicalTrials.gov)和全文参考书目以查找相关内容。纳入的所有研究均通过QUADAS-2(诊断准确度研究-2的质量评估)进行了严格评估。系统评价ROMA的EOC预测值,并在同一人群中进行ROMA,HE4和CA125的预测性能比较。用双变量模型总结了敏感性,特异性,DOR(诊断比值比),LRα±α(正负似然比)和AUC(接收器工作特征曲线下的面积)。亚组分析和敏感性分析被用来探索异质性。结果从11项研究中检索到7792项测试的数据。用于EOC预测的ROMA总体估计为:敏感性(0.89,95%CI 0.84-0.93),特异性(0.83,95%CI 0.77-0.88)和AUC(0.93,95%CI 0.90-0.95)。比较HE4和CA125之间的EOC预测值,特异性:HE4(0.93,95%CI 0.87-0.96)>?CA125(0.84,95%CI 0.76-0.90); AUC:CA125(0.88,95%CI 0.85-0.91)→ΔHE4(0.82,95%CI 0.78-0.85)。比较HE4和CA125之间的OC预测值,AUC:CA125(0.89,95%CI 0.85-0.91)>ΔHE4(0.79,95%CI 0.76-0.83)。比较了三种EOC预测测试的敏感性:ROMA(0.86,95%CI 0.81-0.91)>?HE4(0.80,95%CI 0.73-0.85);特异性:HE4(0.94,95%CI 0.90-0.96)→ΔROMA(0.84,95%CI 0.79-0.88)→CA125(0.78,95%CI 0.73-0.83)。结论ROMA有助于区分上皮性卵巢癌与盆腔良性肿块。对于EOC或OC预测,HE4都不比CA125更好。 ROMA是有望替代CA125的上皮性卵巢癌的预测指标,但其应用尚需进一步探索。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号