肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA242和CEA在胰腺癌诊断中的meta分析

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
International journal of clinical and experimental medicine Pub Date : 2015-07-15 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01
Yimin Zhang, Jun Yang, Hongjuan Li, Yihua Wu, Honghe Zhang, Wenhu Chen
{"title":"肿瘤标志物CA19-9、CA242和CEA在胰腺癌诊断中的meta分析","authors":"Yimin Zhang,&nbsp;Jun Yang,&nbsp;Hongjuan Li,&nbsp;Yihua Wu,&nbsp;Honghe Zhang,&nbsp;Wenhu Chen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pancreatic cancer has the worst prognosis and early detection is crucial for improving patient prognosis. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of single test of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA, as well as combination test in pancreatic cancer detection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Wanfang databases for studies that evaluated the diagnostic validity of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA between January 1990 and September 2014. Data were analyzed by Meta-Disc and STATA software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 21 studies including 3497 participants, which fulfilled the inclusion criteria were considered for analysis. The pooled sensitivities for CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 75.4 (95% CI: 73.4-77.4), 67.8 (95% CI: 65.5-70), and 39.5 (95% CI: 37.3-41.7), respectively. The pooled specificities of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 77.6 (95% CI: 75.4-79.7), 83 (95% CI: 81-85), and 81.3 (95% CI: 79.3-83.2), respectively. Parallel combination of CA19-9+CA242 has a higher sensitivity (89, 95% CI: 80-95) without impairing the specificity (75, 95% CI: 67-82).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-analysis showed that CA242 and CA19-9 have better performance in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer than CEA. Furthermore, parallel combination test of CA19-9+CA242 could be of better diagnostic value than individual CA242 or CA19-9 test.</p>","PeriodicalId":13892,"journal":{"name":"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4565388/pdf/ijcem0008-11683.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tumor markers CA19-9, CA242 and CEA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yimin Zhang,&nbsp;Jun Yang,&nbsp;Hongjuan Li,&nbsp;Yihua Wu,&nbsp;Honghe Zhang,&nbsp;Wenhu Chen\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pancreatic cancer has the worst prognosis and early detection is crucial for improving patient prognosis. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of single test of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA, as well as combination test in pancreatic cancer detection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Wanfang databases for studies that evaluated the diagnostic validity of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA between January 1990 and September 2014. Data were analyzed by Meta-Disc and STATA software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 21 studies including 3497 participants, which fulfilled the inclusion criteria were considered for analysis. The pooled sensitivities for CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 75.4 (95% CI: 73.4-77.4), 67.8 (95% CI: 65.5-70), and 39.5 (95% CI: 37.3-41.7), respectively. The pooled specificities of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 77.6 (95% CI: 75.4-79.7), 83 (95% CI: 81-85), and 81.3 (95% CI: 79.3-83.2), respectively. Parallel combination of CA19-9+CA242 has a higher sensitivity (89, 95% CI: 80-95) without impairing the specificity (75, 95% CI: 67-82).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-analysis showed that CA242 and CA19-9 have better performance in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer than CEA. Furthermore, parallel combination test of CA19-9+CA242 could be of better diagnostic value than individual CA242 or CA19-9 test.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13892,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4565388/pdf/ijcem0008-11683.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:胰腺癌预后最差,早期发现对改善患者预后至关重要。因此,我们进行meta分析,评价比较CA19-9、CA242、CEA单项检测和联合检测在胰腺癌检测中的敏感性和特异性。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Medline和万方数据库,检索1990年1月至2014年9月间评价CA19-9、CA242和CEA诊断有效性的研究。采用Meta-Disc和STATA软件对数据进行分析。结果:共纳入21项研究3497名受试者,符合纳入标准。CA19-9、CA242和CEA的总敏感性分别为75.4 (95% CI: 73.4-77.4)、67.8 (95% CI: 65.5-70)和39.5 (95% CI: 37.3-41.7)。CA19-9、CA242和CEA的合并特异性分别为77.6 (95% CI: 75.4-79.7)、83 (95% CI: 81-85)和81.3 (95% CI: 79.3-83.2)。CA19-9+CA242的平行组合具有更高的灵敏度(89,95% CI: 80-95),而不影响特异性(75,95% CI: 67-82)。结论:我们的荟萃分析显示,CA242和CA19-9在胰腺癌诊断中的表现优于CEA。CA19-9+CA242平行联合检测比单独CA242或CA19-9检测具有更好的诊断价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tumor markers CA19-9, CA242 and CEA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis.

Background: Pancreatic cancer has the worst prognosis and early detection is crucial for improving patient prognosis. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of single test of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA, as well as combination test in pancreatic cancer detection.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Wanfang databases for studies that evaluated the diagnostic validity of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA between January 1990 and September 2014. Data were analyzed by Meta-Disc and STATA software.

Results: A total of 21 studies including 3497 participants, which fulfilled the inclusion criteria were considered for analysis. The pooled sensitivities for CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 75.4 (95% CI: 73.4-77.4), 67.8 (95% CI: 65.5-70), and 39.5 (95% CI: 37.3-41.7), respectively. The pooled specificities of CA19-9, CA242, and CEA were 77.6 (95% CI: 75.4-79.7), 83 (95% CI: 81-85), and 81.3 (95% CI: 79.3-83.2), respectively. Parallel combination of CA19-9+CA242 has a higher sensitivity (89, 95% CI: 80-95) without impairing the specificity (75, 95% CI: 67-82).

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis showed that CA242 and CA19-9 have better performance in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer than CEA. Furthermore, parallel combination test of CA19-9+CA242 could be of better diagnostic value than individual CA242 or CA19-9 test.

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
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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