中华检验医学杂志
中華檢驗醫學雜誌
중화검험의학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF LABORATORY MEDICINE
2013年
1期
72-76
,共5页
金霞霞%沈波%颜海希%沈毅
金霞霞%瀋波%顏海希%瀋毅
금하하%침파%안해희%침의
卵巢肿瘤%附睾分泌蛋白质类%CA-125抗原%Meta分析
卵巢腫瘤%附睪分泌蛋白質類%CA-125抗原%Meta分析
란소종류%부고분비단백질류%CA-125항원%Meta분석
Ovarian neoplasms%Epididymal secretory proteins%CA-125 antigen%Meta analysis
目的 通过Meta分析评价人附睾蛋白4(HE4)、HE4/糖类抗原125(CA125)并联检测对人卵巢癌的诊断价值.方法 通过检索Pubmed、Embase和中国知网期刊数据库(CNKI)等,获得有关以血清HEA、HE4/CA125并联检测诊断卵巢癌的文献.由2位研究者按照纳入与排除标准独立选择文献、提取资料和评价质量后,采用Meta-Disc1.4进行Meta分析,绘制综合受试者操作特性(SROC)曲线,并计算曲线下面积(AUC).采用Z检验对HE4、HE4/CA125并联检测的AUC进行比较；运用Stata 11.0软件,选用Egger法进行发表偏倚检测.结果 共纳入14篇文献,对照组可分为健康对照组和良性疾病组.健康对照组HE4、HE4/CA125并联检测诊断卵巢癌的AUC分别为0.9502 ±0.0137、0.9588±0.0113,差异无统计学意义(Z =0.484,P＞0.05).良性疾病组存在异质性,cut-off值是引起异质性的原因.HE4、HE4/CA125并联检测诊断卵巢癌的AUC分别为0.9153±0.0095、0.9323±0.0082,差异无统计学意义(Z=1.350,P＞0.05).设置cut-off值为150 pmol/L的亚组,HE4、HE4/CA125并联检测诊断卵巢癌的AUC分别为0.9032±0.0174、0.9267 ±0.0176,差异无统计学意义(Z =0.950,P＞0.05).结论 血清HE4、HE4/CA125并联检测对于卵巢癌的临床诊断均具有较高的曲线下面积,HE4检测具有较高的特异度,而HE4/CA125并联检测则具有较高的敏感度,但两者对卵巢癌的诊断价值差异无统计学意义.
目的 通過Meta分析評價人附睪蛋白4(HE4)、HE4/糖類抗原125(CA125)併聯檢測對人卵巢癌的診斷價值.方法 通過檢索Pubmed、Embase和中國知網期刊數據庫(CNKI)等,穫得有關以血清HEA、HE4/CA125併聯檢測診斷卵巢癌的文獻.由2位研究者按照納入與排除標準獨立選擇文獻、提取資料和評價質量後,採用Meta-Disc1.4進行Meta分析,繪製綜閤受試者操作特性(SROC)麯線,併計算麯線下麵積(AUC).採用Z檢驗對HE4、HE4/CA125併聯檢測的AUC進行比較；運用Stata 11.0軟件,選用Egger法進行髮錶偏倚檢測.結果 共納入14篇文獻,對照組可分為健康對照組和良性疾病組.健康對照組HE4、HE4/CA125併聯檢測診斷卵巢癌的AUC分彆為0.9502 ±0.0137、0.9588±0.0113,差異無統計學意義(Z =0.484,P＞0.05).良性疾病組存在異質性,cut-off值是引起異質性的原因.HE4、HE4/CA125併聯檢測診斷卵巢癌的AUC分彆為0.9153±0.0095、0.9323±0.0082,差異無統計學意義(Z=1.350,P＞0.05).設置cut-off值為150 pmol/L的亞組,HE4、HE4/CA125併聯檢測診斷卵巢癌的AUC分彆為0.9032±0.0174、0.9267 ±0.0176,差異無統計學意義(Z =0.950,P＞0.05).結論 血清HE4、HE4/CA125併聯檢測對于卵巢癌的臨床診斷均具有較高的麯線下麵積,HE4檢測具有較高的特異度,而HE4/CA125併聯檢測則具有較高的敏感度,但兩者對卵巢癌的診斷價值差異無統計學意義.
목적 통과Meta분석평개인부고단백4(HE4)、HE4/당류항원125(CA125)병련검측대인란소암적진단개치.방법 통과검색Pubmed、Embase화중국지망기간수거고(CNKI)등,획득유관이혈청HEA、HE4/CA125병련검측진단란소암적문헌.유2위연구자안조납입여배제표준독립선택문헌、제취자료화평개질량후,채용Meta-Disc1.4진행Meta분석,회제종합수시자조작특성(SROC)곡선,병계산곡선하면적(AUC).채용Z검험대HE4、HE4/CA125병련검측적AUC진행비교；운용Stata 11.0연건,선용Egger법진행발표편의검측.결과 공납입14편문헌,대조조가분위건강대조조화량성질병조.건강대조조HE4、HE4/CA125병련검측진단란소암적AUC분별위0.9502 ±0.0137、0.9588±0.0113,차이무통계학의의(Z =0.484,P＞0.05).량성질병조존재이질성,cut-off치시인기이질성적원인.HE4、HE4/CA125병련검측진단란소암적AUC분별위0.9153±0.0095、0.9323±0.0082,차이무통계학의의(Z=1.350,P＞0.05).설치cut-off치위150 pmol/L적아조,HE4、HE4/CA125병련검측진단란소암적AUC분별위0.9032±0.0174、0.9267 ±0.0176,차이무통계학의의(Z =0.950,P＞0.05).결론 혈청HE4、HE4/CA125병련검측대우란소암적림상진단균구유교고적곡선하면적,HE4검측구유교고적특이도,이HE4/CA125병련검측칙구유교고적민감도,단량자대란소암적진단개치차이무통계학의의.
Objective To evaluate the diagnostic value of Human Epididymal Protein 4(HE4) and HE4/Cancer Antigen 125 (CA125) parallel detection for ovarian cancer by meta-analysis.Methods The databases,such as Pubmed,Embase and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI),were employed to search for the studies related to diagnostic value of HE4 and HE4/CA125 parallel detection for ovarian cancer.The screening,data extraction and quality assessment were conducted in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two reviewers independently.The software Meta-disc 1.4 was used to perform meta-analysis and draw the forest plots and the Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) curves.The AUCs of HE4,HE4/CA125 parallel detection were detected by Z test.The Egger's regression test was applied to evaluate the publication bias by Stata11.0.Results A total of 14 studies with benign control and/or healthy control were included.In the studies with healthy control.The AUCs of HE4,HE4/CA125 parallel detection were 0.9502 ± 0.0137 and 0.9588 ± 0.0113 respectively,but there was no significant difference between them (Z =0.484,P ＞ 0.05) ;In the studies with benign control.The value of cutoff was the most important cause of heterogeneity.The AUCs of HE4,HE4/CA125 parallel detection were 0.9153 ± 0.0095 and 0.9323 ± 0.0082 respectively,but with no significant difference (Z =1.350,P ＞ 0.05).In the subgroup with cut-off value divided by 150 pmoL/L,the AUCs of HE4,HE4/CA125 parallel detection were 0.9032±0.0174 and 0.9267 ±0.0176 respectively,but there was no significant difference between them (Z =0.950,P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Both HE4 and HE4/CA125 parallel detection had meaningful values for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.The detection of HE4 had a higher specificity,while the HE4/CA125 parallel detection had a higher sensitivity.But there was no statistical difference between them in diagnosis value of ovarian cancer.
