新的等级标准对孩子适用

M. Aringer
{"title":"新的等级标准对孩子适用","authors":"M. Aringer","doi":"10.1159/000528777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Importance/background: Several diagnostic criteria have been developed to effectively diagnose systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Three criteria are most common, namely the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR)-2019. Whether they also apply to juvenile SLE is unclear. Objective: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 for juvenile SLE. Data sources: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted up to 26 March 2022. Study selection: We included all study designs in which patients had any index tests for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, or EULAR/ACR-2019; both full-text papers and conference abstracts published in English were used. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) case reports; (2) adult subjects; or (3) did not report sufficient information to acquire true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative values of diagnostic criteria. Data extraction and synthesis: Two authors independently screened studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias. Main outcomes and measures: First, a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EULAR/ACR-2019 and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then carried out a network meta-analysis to compare the performances of these three diagnostic criteria. Results: In total, 17 relevant studies that included 2339 juvenile SLE patients were eligible to analyze pooled accuracy. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies (1613 cases) reported the diagnostic performance of EULAR/ACR-2019, showing a pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89–0.95), pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.77–0.95), and area under HSROC of 0.96 (0.94–0.97). In the network meta-analysis, the SLICC-2012 (0.94, 0.92–0.96) had the highest sensitivity, followed by EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.93, 0.90–0.95), and ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72–0.82); the ACR-1997 (0.96, 0.92–0.98) demonstrated the highest specificity. EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.92, 0.87–0.96) and SLICC-2012 (0.92, 0.86–0.96) had the similar specificity. Conclusions and relevance: We found that the applicability of the new EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in juvenile SLE is not yet the best diagnostic tool. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022321514.","PeriodicalId":17887,"journal":{"name":"Kompass Autoimmun","volume":"132 1","pages":"19 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neue SLE-Klassifikationskriterien funktionieren bei Kindern\",\"authors\":\"M. Aringer\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000528777\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Importance/background: Several diagnostic criteria have been developed to effectively diagnose systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Three criteria are most common, namely the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR)-2019. Whether they also apply to juvenile SLE is unclear. Objective: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 for juvenile SLE. Data sources: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted up to 26 March 2022. Study selection: We included all study designs in which patients had any index tests for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, or EULAR/ACR-2019; both full-text papers and conference abstracts published in English were used. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) case reports; (2) adult subjects; or (3) did not report sufficient information to acquire true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative values of diagnostic criteria. Data extraction and synthesis: Two authors independently screened studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias. Main outcomes and measures: First, a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EULAR/ACR-2019 and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then carried out a network meta-analysis to compare the performances of these three diagnostic criteria. Results: In total, 17 relevant studies that included 2339 juvenile SLE patients were eligible to analyze pooled accuracy. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies (1613 cases) reported the diagnostic performance of EULAR/ACR-2019, showing a pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89–0.95), pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.77–0.95), and area under HSROC of 0.96 (0.94–0.97). In the network meta-analysis, the SLICC-2012 (0.94, 0.92–0.96) had the highest sensitivity, followed by EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.93, 0.90–0.95), and ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72–0.82); the ACR-1997 (0.96, 0.92–0.98) demonstrated the highest specificity. EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.92, 0.87–0.96) and SLICC-2012 (0.92, 0.86–0.96) had the similar specificity. Conclusions and relevance: We found that the applicability of the new EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in juvenile SLE is not yet the best diagnostic tool. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022321514.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17887,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kompass Autoimmun\",\"volume\":\"132 1\",\"pages\":\"19 - 20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kompass Autoimmun\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000528777\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kompass Autoimmun","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000528777","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性/背景:为了有效诊断系统性红斑狼疮(SLE),已经制定了几种诊断标准。三个最常见的标准,即美国风湿病学会(ACR)-1997,系统性狼疮国际合作诊所(SLICC)-2012和欧洲抗风湿病联盟(EULAR/ACR)-2019。它们是否也适用于青少年SLE尚不清楚。目的:探讨ACR-1997、SLICC-2012和EULAR/ACR-2019对青少年SLE的诊断准确性。数据来源:对PubMed、Cochrane和Embase进行了全面检索,截止到2022年3月26日。研究选择:我们纳入了所有患者进行ACR-1997、SLICC-2012或EULAR/ACR-2019指标测试的研究设计;论文全文和会议摘要均以英文出版。排除标准如下:(1)病例报告;(2)成人受试者;或者(3)没有报告足够的信息来获得诊断标准的真阳性、假阳性、真阴性和假阴性值。数据提取和综合:两位作者独立筛选研究,提取相关数据,并评估偏倚风险。主要结果和测量方法:首先,对EULAR/ACR-2019的诊断准确性进行荟萃分析,并采用分层汇总受试者工作特征(HSROC)模型,以95%置信区间(ci)估计敏感性和特异性。然后,我们进行了网络荟萃分析来比较这三个诊断标准的性能。结果:共有17项相关研究纳入2339例幼年SLE患者,符合汇总准确性分析。在荟萃分析中,10项研究(1613例)报告了EULAR/ACR-2019的诊断性能,合并敏感性为0.92 (95% CI, 0.89 - 0.95),合并特异性为0.89 (0.77-0.95),HSROC下面积为0.96(0.94-0.97)。在网络meta分析中,SLICC-2012(0.94, 0.92-0.96)的敏感性最高,其次是EULAR/ACR-2019(0.93, 0.90-0.95)和ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72-0.82);ACR-1997(0.96, 0.92-0.98)的特异性最高。EULAR/ACR-2019(0.92, 0.87-0.96)和SLICC-2012(0.92, 0.86-0.96)具有相似的特异性。结论和相关性:我们发现新的EULAR/ACR-2019标准在青少年SLE中的适用性尚未成为最佳诊断工具。试验注册:PROSPERO CRD42022321514。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Neue SLE-Klassifikationskriterien funktionieren bei Kindern
Importance/background: Several diagnostic criteria have been developed to effectively diagnose systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Three criteria are most common, namely the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR/ACR)-2019. Whether they also apply to juvenile SLE is unclear. Objective: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 for juvenile SLE. Data sources: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted up to 26 March 2022. Study selection: We included all study designs in which patients had any index tests for ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, or EULAR/ACR-2019; both full-text papers and conference abstracts published in English were used. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) case reports; (2) adult subjects; or (3) did not report sufficient information to acquire true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative values of diagnostic criteria. Data extraction and synthesis: Two authors independently screened studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias. Main outcomes and measures: First, a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EULAR/ACR-2019 and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model was performed to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We then carried out a network meta-analysis to compare the performances of these three diagnostic criteria. Results: In total, 17 relevant studies that included 2339 juvenile SLE patients were eligible to analyze pooled accuracy. In the meta-analysis, 10 studies (1613 cases) reported the diagnostic performance of EULAR/ACR-2019, showing a pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89–0.95), pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.77–0.95), and area under HSROC of 0.96 (0.94–0.97). In the network meta-analysis, the SLICC-2012 (0.94, 0.92–0.96) had the highest sensitivity, followed by EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.93, 0.90–0.95), and ACR-1997 (0.78, 0.72–0.82); the ACR-1997 (0.96, 0.92–0.98) demonstrated the highest specificity. EULAR/ACR-2019 (0.92, 0.87–0.96) and SLICC-2012 (0.92, 0.86–0.96) had the similar specificity. Conclusions and relevance: We found that the applicability of the new EULAR/ACR-2019 criteria in juvenile SLE is not yet the best diagnostic tool. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022321514.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Morbus Crohn: Vielversprechende Behandlungsoption eines neuen IL-23-Inhibitors auf dem Weg zur Zulassung Moderne Immunologie hat unsere Behandlungsoptionen stark verändert Behandlung der eosinophilen Granulomatose mit Polyangiitis: Ist Benralizumab eine Alternative? Treat hard and early in SSc-ILD: milde ILD ist immer noch ILD Biologische Therapie bei systemischem Lupus erythematodes, Antiphospholipid-Syndrom und Sjögren-Syndrom: evidenz- und praxisbasierte Leitlinien
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1