{"title":"戊型肝炎病毒抗体检测的诊断准确性:综合荟萃分析。","authors":"Ulugbek Khudayberdievich Mirzaev, Yayoi Yoshinaga, Mirzarakhim Baynazarov, Serge Ouoba, Ko Ko, Zayar Phyo, Chanroth Chhoung, Golda Ataa Akuffo, Aya Sugiyama, Tomoyuki Akita, Kazuaki Takahashi, Shingo Fukuma, Junko Tanaka","doi":"10.1111/hepr.14132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major global health issue, with an estimated 20 million infections annually. Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the diagnostic gold standard due to its precision, it is expensive and technically demanding. Antibody tests offer a more practical and cost-effective alternative, although their accuracy can vary due to factors, such as test manufacturer, antigen composition, HEV genotype, and host immune status.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies included comparing the sensitivity and specificity of immunoglobulin M or immunoglobulin G antibody tests to PCR. Exclusion criteria were non-PCR comparisons, sample sizes under 10, IgA or antigen tests, non-human samples, or missing sensitivity and specificity data. Only English-language full-texts or abstracts were considered. Data analysis was performed using Meta-DTA v2.1.1 and Stata 16.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis evaluated 8054 blood samples from 21 studies. Immunoglobulin M antibody tests demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 76-88) and specificity of 98% (95% CI 97-99). Immunoglobulin G tests showed a sensitivity of 74% (95% CI 62-82) and specificity of 89% (95% CI 84-93). Among manufacturers, Wantai was the most accurate for immunoglobulin M detection, whereas MP led for immunoglobulin G. Notably, test sensitivity improved when the test protein genotype aligned with the HEV genotype.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis confirmed that antibody assays have a good sensitivity and high specificity to detect HEV infection in situations where PCR is not feasible, highlighting their potential as a practical diagnostic tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":12987,"journal":{"name":"Hepatology Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic accuracy of hepatitis E virus antibody tests: A comprehensive meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ulugbek Khudayberdievich Mirzaev, Yayoi Yoshinaga, Mirzarakhim Baynazarov, Serge Ouoba, Ko Ko, Zayar Phyo, Chanroth Chhoung, Golda Ataa Akuffo, Aya Sugiyama, Tomoyuki Akita, Kazuaki Takahashi, Shingo Fukuma, Junko Tanaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hepr.14132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major global health issue, with an estimated 20 million infections annually. Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the diagnostic gold standard due to its precision, it is expensive and technically demanding. Antibody tests offer a more practical and cost-effective alternative, although their accuracy can vary due to factors, such as test manufacturer, antigen composition, HEV genotype, and host immune status.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies included comparing the sensitivity and specificity of immunoglobulin M or immunoglobulin G antibody tests to PCR. Exclusion criteria were non-PCR comparisons, sample sizes under 10, IgA or antigen tests, non-human samples, or missing sensitivity and specificity data. Only English-language full-texts or abstracts were considered. Data analysis was performed using Meta-DTA v2.1.1 and Stata 16.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis evaluated 8054 blood samples from 21 studies. Immunoglobulin M antibody tests demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 76-88) and specificity of 98% (95% CI 97-99). Immunoglobulin G tests showed a sensitivity of 74% (95% CI 62-82) and specificity of 89% (95% CI 84-93). Among manufacturers, Wantai was the most accurate for immunoglobulin M detection, whereas MP led for immunoglobulin G. Notably, test sensitivity improved when the test protein genotype aligned with the HEV genotype.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis confirmed that antibody assays have a good sensitivity and high specificity to detect HEV infection in situations where PCR is not feasible, highlighting their potential as a practical diagnostic tool.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12987,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hepatology Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hepatology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/hepr.14132\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hepatology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/hepr.14132","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:戊型肝炎病毒(HEV)是一个重大的全球健康问题,估计每年感染人数达 2000 万。尽管聚合酶链反应(PCR)因其精确性而成为诊断的黄金标准,但它价格昂贵且技术要求高。抗体检测提供了一种更实用、更具成本效益的替代方法,但其准确性会因检测制造商、抗原组成、HEV 基因型和宿主免疫状态等因素而有所不同:方法:在 PubMed、Cochrane、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库中进行了全面检索。研究包括比较免疫球蛋白 M 或免疫球蛋白 G 抗体检测与 PCR 检测的灵敏度和特异性。排除标准为非 PCR 比较、样本量少于 10、IgA 或抗原检测、非人类样本或灵敏度和特异性数据缺失。仅考虑英文全文或摘要。数据分析使用 Meta-DTA v2.1.1 和 Stata 16.0.Results:荟萃分析评估了来自 21 项研究的 8054 份血液样本。免疫球蛋白 M 抗体检测的总体灵敏度为 83%(95% CI 76-88),特异性为 98%(95% CI 97-99)。免疫球蛋白 G 检测的灵敏度为 74%(95% CI 62-82),特异性为 89%(95% CI 84-93)。值得注意的是,当检测蛋白基因型与 HEV 基因型一致时,检测灵敏度会提高:这项荟萃分析证实,在无法进行 PCR 检测的情况下,抗体检测法在检测 HEV 感染方面具有良好的灵敏度和较高的特异性,凸显了其作为实用诊断工具的潜力。
Diagnostic accuracy of hepatitis E virus antibody tests: A comprehensive meta-analysis.
Aim: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major global health issue, with an estimated 20 million infections annually. Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the diagnostic gold standard due to its precision, it is expensive and technically demanding. Antibody tests offer a more practical and cost-effective alternative, although their accuracy can vary due to factors, such as test manufacturer, antigen composition, HEV genotype, and host immune status.
Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies included comparing the sensitivity and specificity of immunoglobulin M or immunoglobulin G antibody tests to PCR. Exclusion criteria were non-PCR comparisons, sample sizes under 10, IgA or antigen tests, non-human samples, or missing sensitivity and specificity data. Only English-language full-texts or abstracts were considered. Data analysis was performed using Meta-DTA v2.1.1 and Stata 16.0.
Results: The meta-analysis evaluated 8054 blood samples from 21 studies. Immunoglobulin M antibody tests demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 76-88) and specificity of 98% (95% CI 97-99). Immunoglobulin G tests showed a sensitivity of 74% (95% CI 62-82) and specificity of 89% (95% CI 84-93). Among manufacturers, Wantai was the most accurate for immunoglobulin M detection, whereas MP led for immunoglobulin G. Notably, test sensitivity improved when the test protein genotype aligned with the HEV genotype.
Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirmed that antibody assays have a good sensitivity and high specificity to detect HEV infection in situations where PCR is not feasible, highlighting their potential as a practical diagnostic tool.
期刊介绍:
Hepatology Research (formerly International Hepatology Communications) is the official journal of the Japan Society of Hepatology, and publishes original articles, reviews and short comunications dealing with hepatology. Reviews or mini-reviews are especially welcomed from those areas within hepatology undergoing rapid changes. Short communications should contain concise definitive information.