GastroPanel®与GENEDIA®诊断幽门螺杆菌感染及胃病变的比较

IF 2.5 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Yonghoon Choi, Nayoung Kim, Seon Hee Lim, Ji Hyun Park, Jeong Hwan Lee, Yeejin Kim, Hyemin Jo, Ho-Kyoung Lee, Jinju Choi, Yu Kyung Jun, Hyuk Yoon, Cheol Min Shin, Young Soo Park, Dong Ho Lee
{"title":"GastroPanel®与GENEDIA®诊断幽门螺杆菌感染及胃病变的比较","authors":"Yonghoon Choi, Nayoung Kim, Seon Hee Lim, Ji Hyun Park, Jeong Hwan Lee, Yeejin Kim, Hyemin Jo, Ho-Kyoung Lee, Jinju Choi, Yu Kyung Jun, Hyuk Yoon, Cheol Min Shin, Young Soo Park, Dong Ho Lee","doi":"10.15430/JCP.24.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Serological tests for <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> needs local validation as the diagnostic accuracy may vary depending on the prevalence of <i>H</i>. <i>pylori</i>. This study examined the diagnostic performance of two ELISA, GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> (GastroPanel ELISA; Biohit Oyj) and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> (GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> <i>H</i>. <i>pylori</i> ELISA, Green Cross Co.) in Korean population. One thousand seventy seven patients who visited for esophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively enrolled, and serum samples from the subjects were tested using both GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup>. The two tests were compared for their diagnostic accuracy in detecting atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), gastric adenoma (GA), and gastric cancer (GC), and the positivity rates by age and sex were observed. There was substantial correlation (Pearson coefficient [r] = 0.512, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and agreement (Cohen's Kappa coefficient [κ] = 0.723, <i>P</i> < 0.001) between the results obtained using GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup>. The test results from the two kits did not match perfectly with a discrepancy observed in approximately 16% of cases, that 67 subjects were positive only on GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> while 75 subjects were positive only on GastroPanel<sup>®</sup>. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve for AG, IM, GA, and GC using GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> were 0.666, 0.635, 0.540, and 0.575, while the results tested using GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> were 0.649, 0.604, 0.553, and 0.555, respectively, without significant difference between the two results. GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> showed similar performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy; but the test results did not match perfectly. A large-scale validation study in Koreans is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":15120,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Prevention","volume":"29 4","pages":"148-156"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11706727/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> in Diagnosing <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> Infection and Gastric Lesions.\",\"authors\":\"Yonghoon Choi, Nayoung Kim, Seon Hee Lim, Ji Hyun Park, Jeong Hwan Lee, Yeejin Kim, Hyemin Jo, Ho-Kyoung Lee, Jinju Choi, Yu Kyung Jun, Hyuk Yoon, Cheol Min Shin, Young Soo Park, Dong Ho Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.15430/JCP.24.024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Serological tests for <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> needs local validation as the diagnostic accuracy may vary depending on the prevalence of <i>H</i>. <i>pylori</i>. This study examined the diagnostic performance of two ELISA, GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> (GastroPanel ELISA; Biohit Oyj) and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> (GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> <i>H</i>. <i>pylori</i> ELISA, Green Cross Co.) in Korean population. One thousand seventy seven patients who visited for esophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively enrolled, and serum samples from the subjects were tested using both GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup>. The two tests were compared for their diagnostic accuracy in detecting atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), gastric adenoma (GA), and gastric cancer (GC), and the positivity rates by age and sex were observed. There was substantial correlation (Pearson coefficient [r] = 0.512, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and agreement (Cohen's Kappa coefficient [κ] = 0.723, <i>P</i> < 0.001) between the results obtained using GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup>. The test results from the two kits did not match perfectly with a discrepancy observed in approximately 16% of cases, that 67 subjects were positive only on GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> while 75 subjects were positive only on GastroPanel<sup>®</sup>. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve for AG, IM, GA, and GC using GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> were 0.666, 0.635, 0.540, and 0.575, while the results tested using GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> were 0.649, 0.604, 0.553, and 0.555, respectively, without significant difference between the two results. GastroPanel<sup>®</sup> and GENEDIA<sup>®</sup> showed similar performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy; but the test results did not match perfectly. A large-scale validation study in Koreans is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15120,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Prevention\",\"volume\":\"29 4\",\"pages\":\"148-156\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11706727/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Prevention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15430/JCP.24.024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15430/JCP.24.024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

幽门螺杆菌的血清学检测需要在当地进行验证,因为诊断的准确性可能因幽门螺杆菌的患病率而异。本研究检测了两种ELISA的诊断性能,GastroPanel®(GastroPanel ELISA;Biohit Oyj)和GENEDIA®(GENEDIA®H. pylori ELISA, Green Cross Co.)在韩国人群中的检测。前瞻性纳入2013年至2023年间进行食管胃十二指肠镜检查的1777例患者,并使用GastroPanel®和GENEDIA®对受试者的血清样本进行测试。比较两种方法对萎缩性胃炎(AG)、肠化生(IM)、胃腺瘤(GA)、胃癌(GC)的诊断准确率,并观察两种方法在年龄、性别上的阳性率。使用GastroPanel®和GENEDIA®获得的结果具有显著的相关性(Pearson系数[r] = 0.512, P < 0.001)和一致性(Cohen's Kappa系数[κ] = 0.723, P < 0.001)。两种试剂盒的检测结果并不完全匹配,在大约16%的病例中观察到差异,67名受试者仅在GENEDIA®上呈阳性,而75名受试者仅在GastroPanel®上呈阳性。使用GastroPanel®检测AG、IM、GA和GC的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.666、0.635、0.540和0.575,而使用GENEDIA®检测的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.649、0.604、0.553和0.555,两者结果无显著差异。GastroPanel®和GENEDIA®在诊断准确性方面表现相似;但测试结果并不完全吻合。需要在韩国进行大规模的验证研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® in Diagnosing Helicobacter pylori Infection and Gastric Lesions.

Serological tests for Helicobacter pylori needs local validation as the diagnostic accuracy may vary depending on the prevalence of H. pylori. This study examined the diagnostic performance of two ELISA, GastroPanel® (GastroPanel ELISA; Biohit Oyj) and GENEDIA® (GENEDIA® H. pylori ELISA, Green Cross Co.) in Korean population. One thousand seventy seven patients who visited for esophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively enrolled, and serum samples from the subjects were tested using both GastroPanel® and GENEDIA®. The two tests were compared for their diagnostic accuracy in detecting atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), gastric adenoma (GA), and gastric cancer (GC), and the positivity rates by age and sex were observed. There was substantial correlation (Pearson coefficient [r] = 0.512, P < 0.001) and agreement (Cohen's Kappa coefficient [κ] = 0.723, P < 0.001) between the results obtained using GastroPanel® and GENEDIA®. The test results from the two kits did not match perfectly with a discrepancy observed in approximately 16% of cases, that 67 subjects were positive only on GENEDIA® while 75 subjects were positive only on GastroPanel®. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve for AG, IM, GA, and GC using GastroPanel® were 0.666, 0.635, 0.540, and 0.575, while the results tested using GENEDIA® were 0.649, 0.604, 0.553, and 0.555, respectively, without significant difference between the two results. GastroPanel® and GENEDIA® showed similar performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy; but the test results did not match perfectly. A large-scale validation study in Koreans is needed.

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
4.00%
发文量
32
×
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