• Asian Pac J Cancer P · Jan 2012

    Review

    Diagnostic value of human epididymis protein 4 compared with mesothelin for ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Jia-Ying Lin, Jin-Bao Qin, Xiao-Yan Li, Ping Dong, and Bing-De Yin.
    • Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
    • Asian Pac J Cancer P. 2012 Jan 1; 13 (11): 5427-32.

    Background And PurposeOvarian cancer is the leading cause of death among gynecologic cancers because of the lack of effective early detection methods. Accuracies of the human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) and mesothelin in detecting ovarian cancer have never been systematically assessed. The current systematic review aimed to tackle this issue.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched (September 1995-November 2011) for studies on the diagnostic performances of HE4 and mesothelin in differentiating ovarian cancer from other benign gynecologic diseases. QUADAS items were used to evaluate the qualities of the studies. Meta-DiSc software was used to handle data from the included studies and to examine heterogeneity. All included studies for diagnostic performance were combined with sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves, and areas under the SROC curves (AUC).ResultsA total of 18 studies and 3,865 patients were eligible for the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity estimates for HE4 (74.4%) were significantly higher than those for mesothelin (49.3%). The pooled specificity estimates for mesothelin (94.5%) were higher than those for HE4 (85.8%). The pooled DOR estimates for HE4 (26.22) were higher than those for mesothelin (24.01). The SROC curve for HE4 showed better diagnostic accuracy than that for mesothelin. The PLR and NLR of HE4 were 6.33 (95% CI: 3.58 to 11.18) and 0.27 (95% CI: 0.21 to 0.34), respectively. The PLR and NLR for mesothelin were 11.0 (95% CI: 6.21 to 19.59) and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.42 to 0.62), respectively. The combination of the two tumor markers or their combination with CA-125 increased sensitivity and specificity to different extents.ConclusionThe diagnostic accuracy of HE4 in differentiating ovarian cancer from other benign gynecologic diseases is better than that of soluble mesothelin-related protein. Combinations of two or more tumor markers show more sensitivity and specificity.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…