Comparative analysis of SDC2 and SEPT9 methylation tests in the early detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Frontiers in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fmed.2024.1460233
Jie Zhang, Chenhui Li, Yu An, Bing Wang, Guowei Liang
{"title":"Comparative analysis of SDC2 and SEPT9 methylation tests in the early detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jie Zhang, Chenhui Li, Yu An, Bing Wang, Guowei Liang","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2024.1460233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic efficacy of Syndecan-2(SDC2) and Septin-9(SEPT9) in the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases to identify available publications up to October 2024. A direct head-to-head comparator analysis were performed using the random-effects model. Subgroup analyses and corresponding meta-regressions focusing on sample source, number of patients, region, study design, and methylated detection methods were conducted. Intra-group and inter-group heterogeneity were assessed by Cochrane Q and I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven articles involving 1,913 CRC patients and 2,851 healthy people were included in the meta-analysis. The sensitivity of SDC2 was similar compared to SEPT9 for CRC patients (0.67 vs. 0.71, <i>p</i> = 0.61), SDC2 has a similar specificity in comparison to SEPT9 for CRC patients (0.90 vs. 0.91, <i>p</i> = 0.86). In subgroup analysis, stool SDC2 was similar compared to stool SEPT9 for CRC patients (sensitivity of 0.81 vs. 0.80, <i>p</i> = 0.92; specificity of 0.93 vs. 0.91, <i>p</i> = 0.73), plasma SDC2 was similar compared to plasma SEPT9 for CRC patients (sensitivity of 0.57 vs. 0.72, <i>p</i> = 0.27; specificity of 0.90 vs. 0.89, <i>p</i> = 0.89). In the subgroup analysis of clinical staging for colorectal cancer (CRC), the results indicate that there is no significant difference in sensitivity between the two markers for both early (0.7 vs. 0.67, <i>p</i> = 0.64) and advanced (0.76 vs. 0.70, <i>p</i> = 0.23) stages of CRC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our head-to-head comparison meta-analysis, it was found that SDC2 and SEPT9 have similar sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. However, this result may be influenced by high heterogeneity and further confirmation of this finding is needed through large-scale prospective studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12488,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"11 ","pages":"1460233"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11666333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1460233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic efficacy of Syndecan-2(SDC2) and Septin-9(SEPT9) in the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases to identify available publications up to October 2024. A direct head-to-head comparator analysis were performed using the random-effects model. Subgroup analyses and corresponding meta-regressions focusing on sample source, number of patients, region, study design, and methylated detection methods were conducted. Intra-group and inter-group heterogeneity were assessed by Cochrane Q and I2 statistics.

Results: Eleven articles involving 1,913 CRC patients and 2,851 healthy people were included in the meta-analysis. The sensitivity of SDC2 was similar compared to SEPT9 for CRC patients (0.67 vs. 0.71, p = 0.61), SDC2 has a similar specificity in comparison to SEPT9 for CRC patients (0.90 vs. 0.91, p = 0.86). In subgroup analysis, stool SDC2 was similar compared to stool SEPT9 for CRC patients (sensitivity of 0.81 vs. 0.80, p = 0.92; specificity of 0.93 vs. 0.91, p = 0.73), plasma SDC2 was similar compared to plasma SEPT9 for CRC patients (sensitivity of 0.57 vs. 0.72, p = 0.27; specificity of 0.90 vs. 0.89, p = 0.89). In the subgroup analysis of clinical staging for colorectal cancer (CRC), the results indicate that there is no significant difference in sensitivity between the two markers for both early (0.7 vs. 0.67, p = 0.64) and advanced (0.76 vs. 0.70, p = 0.23) stages of CRC.

Conclusion: In our head-to-head comparison meta-analysis, it was found that SDC2 and SEPT9 have similar sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. However, this result may be influenced by high heterogeneity and further confirmation of this finding is needed through large-scale prospective studies.

SDC2 和 SEPT9 甲基化检测在早期检测结直肠癌中的比较分析:系统综述和荟萃分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Medicine
Frontiers in Medicine Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
5.10%
发文量
3710
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research linking basic research to clinical practice and patient care, as well as translating scientific advances into new therapies and diagnostic tools. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. In addition to papers that provide a link between basic research and clinical practice, a particular emphasis is given to studies that are directly relevant to patient care. In this spirit, the journal publishes the latest research results and medical knowledge that facilitate the translation of scientific advances into new therapies or diagnostic tools. The full listing of the Specialty Sections represented by Frontiers in Medicine is as listed below. As well as the established medical disciplines, Frontiers in Medicine is launching new sections that together will facilitate - the use of patient-reported outcomes under real world conditions - the exploitation of big data and the use of novel information and communication tools in the assessment of new medicines - the scientific bases for guidelines and decisions from regulatory authorities - access to medicinal products and medical devices worldwide - addressing the grand health challenges around the world
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信