Hua Yang, Bing-Qing Xia, Bo Jiang, Guozhen Wang, Yi-Peng Yang, Hao Chen, Bing-Sheng Li, An-Gao Xu, Yun-Bo Huang, Xin-Ying Wang
{"title":"粪便DNA检测对结直肠癌和晚期腺瘤多种标志物的诊断价值:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Hua Yang, Bing-Qing Xia, Bo Jiang, Guozhen Wang, Yi-Peng Yang, Hao Chen, Bing-Sheng Li, An-Gao Xu, Yun-Bo Huang, Xin-Ying Wang","doi":"10.1155/2013/258030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The diagnostic value of stool DNA (sDNA) testing for colorectal neoplasms remains controversial. To compensate for the lack of large-scale unbiased population studies, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of sDNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, Science Direct, Biosis Review, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were systematically searched in January 2012 without time restriction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model using sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic OR (DOR), summary ROC curves, area under the curve (AUC), and 95% CIs as effect measures. Heterogeneity was measured using the χ(2) test and Q statistic; subgroup analysis was also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 studies comprising 5876 individuals were eligible. There was no heterogeneity for CRC, but adenoma and advanced adenoma harboured considerable heterogeneity influenced by risk classification and various detection markers. Stratification analysis according to risk classification showed that multiple markers had a high DOR for the high-risk subgroups of both CRC (sensitivity 0.759 [95% CI 0.711 to 0.804]; specificity 0.883 [95% CI 0.846 to 0.913]; AUC 0.906) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.683 [95% CI 0.584 to 0.771]; specificity 0.918 [95% CI 0.866 to 0.954]; AUC 0.946) but not for the average-risk subgroups of either. In the methylation subgroup, sDNA testing had significantly higher DOR for CRC (sensitivity 0.753 [95% CI 0.685 to 0.812]; specificity 0.913 [95% CI 0.860 to 0.950]; AUC 0.918) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.623 [95% CI 0.527 to 0.712]; specificity 0.926 [95% CI 0.882 to 0.958]; AUC 0.910) compared with the mutation subgroup. There was no significant heterogeneity among studies for subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>sDNA testing for multiple markers had strong diagnostic significance for CRC and advanced adenoma in high-risk subjects. Methylation makers had more diagnostic value than mutation markers.</p>","PeriodicalId":55285,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/258030","citationCount":"42","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic value of stool DNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hua Yang, Bing-Qing Xia, Bo Jiang, Guozhen Wang, Yi-Peng Yang, Hao Chen, Bing-Sheng Li, An-Gao Xu, Yun-Bo Huang, Xin-Ying Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2013/258030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The diagnostic value of stool DNA (sDNA) testing for colorectal neoplasms remains controversial. To compensate for the lack of large-scale unbiased population studies, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of sDNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, Science Direct, Biosis Review, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were systematically searched in January 2012 without time restriction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model using sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic OR (DOR), summary ROC curves, area under the curve (AUC), and 95% CIs as effect measures. Heterogeneity was measured using the χ(2) test and Q statistic; subgroup analysis was also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 studies comprising 5876 individuals were eligible. There was no heterogeneity for CRC, but adenoma and advanced adenoma harboured considerable heterogeneity influenced by risk classification and various detection markers. Stratification analysis according to risk classification showed that multiple markers had a high DOR for the high-risk subgroups of both CRC (sensitivity 0.759 [95% CI 0.711 to 0.804]; specificity 0.883 [95% CI 0.846 to 0.913]; AUC 0.906) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.683 [95% CI 0.584 to 0.771]; specificity 0.918 [95% CI 0.866 to 0.954]; AUC 0.946) but not for the average-risk subgroups of either. In the methylation subgroup, sDNA testing had significantly higher DOR for CRC (sensitivity 0.753 [95% CI 0.685 to 0.812]; specificity 0.913 [95% CI 0.860 to 0.950]; AUC 0.918) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.623 [95% CI 0.527 to 0.712]; specificity 0.926 [95% CI 0.882 to 0.958]; AUC 0.910) compared with the mutation subgroup. There was no significant heterogeneity among studies for subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>sDNA testing for multiple markers had strong diagnostic significance for CRC and advanced adenoma in high-risk subjects. Methylation makers had more diagnostic value than mutation markers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55285,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/258030\",\"citationCount\":\"42\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/258030\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/258030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42
摘要
背景与目的:粪便DNA (sDNA)检测对结直肠肿瘤的诊断价值仍存在争议。为了弥补大规模无偏人群研究的不足,进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估sDNA检测对结直肠癌(CRC)和晚期腺瘤的多种标志物的诊断价值。方法:系统检索2012年1月无时间限制的PubMed、Science Direct、Biosis Review、Cochrane Library和Embase数据库。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析,采用敏感性、特异性、诊断OR (DOR)、汇总ROC曲线、曲线下面积(AUC)和95% ci作为效应测量。采用χ(2)检验和Q统计量测定异质性;并进行亚组分析。结果:共纳入20项研究,共纳入5876名受试者。结直肠癌没有异质性,但腺瘤和晚期腺瘤受风险分类和各种检测标志物的影响,具有相当大的异质性。根据风险分类进行分层分析显示,两种CRC的高危亚组中,多个标记物DOR均较高(敏感性0.759 [95% CI 0.711 ~ 0.804];特异性0.883 [95% CI 0.846 ~ 0.913];AUC 0.906)和晚期腺瘤(敏感性0.683 [95% CI 0.584至0.771];特异性0.918 [95% CI 0.866 ~ 0.954];AUC 0.946),但平均风险亚组均无统计学意义。在甲基化亚组中,sDNA检测对CRC的DOR显著更高(敏感性0.753 [95% CI 0.685至0.812];特异性0.913 [95% CI 0.860 ~ 0.950];AUC 0.918)和晚期腺瘤(敏感性0.623 [95% CI 0.527 ~ 0.712];特异性0.926 [95% CI 0.882 ~ 0.958];AUC 0.910)与突变亚组比较。亚组分析各研究间无显著异质性。结论:sDNA检测多种标志物对高危人群结直肠癌及晚期腺瘤有较强的诊断意义。甲基化标记比突变标记具有更高的诊断价值。
Diagnostic value of stool DNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma: a meta-analysis.
Background and objectives: The diagnostic value of stool DNA (sDNA) testing for colorectal neoplasms remains controversial. To compensate for the lack of large-scale unbiased population studies, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of sDNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma.
Methods: The PubMed, Science Direct, Biosis Review, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were systematically searched in January 2012 without time restriction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model using sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic OR (DOR), summary ROC curves, area under the curve (AUC), and 95% CIs as effect measures. Heterogeneity was measured using the χ(2) test and Q statistic; subgroup analysis was also conducted.
Results: A total of 20 studies comprising 5876 individuals were eligible. There was no heterogeneity for CRC, but adenoma and advanced adenoma harboured considerable heterogeneity influenced by risk classification and various detection markers. Stratification analysis according to risk classification showed that multiple markers had a high DOR for the high-risk subgroups of both CRC (sensitivity 0.759 [95% CI 0.711 to 0.804]; specificity 0.883 [95% CI 0.846 to 0.913]; AUC 0.906) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.683 [95% CI 0.584 to 0.771]; specificity 0.918 [95% CI 0.866 to 0.954]; AUC 0.946) but not for the average-risk subgroups of either. In the methylation subgroup, sDNA testing had significantly higher DOR for CRC (sensitivity 0.753 [95% CI 0.685 to 0.812]; specificity 0.913 [95% CI 0.860 to 0.950]; AUC 0.918) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.623 [95% CI 0.527 to 0.712]; specificity 0.926 [95% CI 0.882 to 0.958]; AUC 0.910) compared with the mutation subgroup. There was no significant heterogeneity among studies for subgroup analysis.
Conclusion: sDNA testing for multiple markers had strong diagnostic significance for CRC and advanced adenoma in high-risk subjects. Methylation makers had more diagnostic value than mutation markers.
期刊介绍:
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of gastroenterology and liver disease - medicine and surgery.
The Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is sponsored by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and the Canadian Association for the Study of the Liver.