Diagnostic value of serum anti-C1q antibodies in patients with lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis
Diagnostic value of serum anti-C1q antibodies in patients with lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis
复制标题
狼疮性肾炎患者血清抗C1q抗体诊断价值的Meta分析
DOI：
10.1177/0961203312451202
复制
发表时间：
2012-07
期刊：
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Zhang, X.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yin, Y.;Wu, X.;Shan, G.;Zhang, X.
抗C1 q自身抗体在系统性红斑狼疮（SLE）患者中已有报道。在过去的十年中，虽然有越来越多的研究表明它在狼疮性肾炎（LN）中具有相对特异性，但其在LN中的整体诊断价值尚未得到评估。Meta分析旨在定量评价抗C1 q自身抗体对LN患者的诊断准确性，并为抗C1 q抗体与LN活动性之间的相关性提供更精确的证据。我们检索了Medline、Embase和科克伦数据库，必要时联系作者。共有25项研究，包括2,502例SLE患者和1,317例LN患者，符合我们的纳入标准。在所有25项研究中，22项研究可用于比较SLE伴和不伴LN，9项研究比较了活动性和非活动性LN患者的抗C1 q。采用受试者工作特征曲线（SROC）总结综合测试性能。QUADAS工具用于评估研究的质量。对于LN的诊断，抗C1 q的合并敏感性和特异性、阳性似然比（PLR）、阴性似然比（NLR）和诊断比值比（DOR）为0.58（0.56-0.61，95%置信区间[95% CI]），0.75（0.72-0.77，95% CI）、2.60（2.06-3.28，95% CI）、0.51（0.41-0.63，95% CI）和6.08（3.91-9.47，95% CI）。SROC曲线下面积（AUC）为0.7941。活动期和非活动期LN的加权敏感性、特异性、PLR、NLR和DOR分别为0.74（0.68-0.79，95% CI）、0.77（0.71-0.82，95% CI）、2.91（1.83-4.65，95% CI）、0.33（0.19-0.56，95% CI）和10.56（4.56-24.46，95% CI）。AUC为0.8378。总之，这项荟萃分析表明，抗C1 q抗体在LN的诊断中具有相对公平的敏感性和特异性，这表明抗C1 q抗体的存在可能是一个有价值的辅助预测LN和评估肾活动。
The autoantibodies against C1q (anti-C1q) have been reported in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In the past decade, though there were increasing studies suggesting it is relatively specific in lupus nephritis (LN), its overall diagnostic value in LN has not been evaluated. The meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of autoantibodies against C1q in patients with LN, and to provide more precise evidence of a correlation between anti-C1q antibodies and activity of LN. We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases and contacted authors if necessary. A total of 25 studies including 2,502 patients with SLE and 1,317 with LN met our inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. Among all 25 studies, 22 studies were available for comparison between SLE with and without LN, and 9 studies compared anti-C1q between patients with active and inactive LN. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was used to summarize comprehensive test performance. The QUADAS tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. For the diagnosis of LN, the pooled sensitivity and specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of anti-C1q were 0.58 (0.56–0.61, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]), 0.75 (0.72–0.77, 95% CI), 2.60 (2.06–3.28, 95% CI), 0.51 (0.41–0.63, 95% CI), and 6.08 (3.91–9.47, 95% CI) respectively. The area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.7941. For comparison between active and inactive LN, the weighted sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR were 0.74 (0.68–0.79, 95% CI), 0.77 (0.71–0.82, 95% CI), 2.91 (1.83–4.65, 95% CI), 0.33 (0.19–0.56, 95% CI), and 10.56 (4.56–24.46, 95% CI) respectively. The AUC was 0.8378. In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicates that anti-C1q antibodies have relatively fair sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of LN, suggesting that the presence of anti-C1q antibodies may be a valuable adjunct for predicting LN and assessing renal activity.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
--
作者：
M. Trendelenburg
通讯作者：
M. Trendelenburg
影响因子：
6.1
作者：
Fang, Qi-Ying;Yu, Feng;Zhao, Ming-hui
通讯作者：
Zhao, Ming-hui
影响因子：
--
作者：
Katsumata, Yasuhiro;Miyake, Kohei;Yamanaka, Hisashi
通讯作者：
Yamanaka, Hisashi
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
--
影响因子：
--
作者：
Pentti Nieminen;James Carpenter;Gerta Rucker;Martin Schumacher
通讯作者：
Pentti Nieminen;James Carpenter;Gerta Rucker;Martin Schumacher
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
A. Ravelli;J. Wisnieski;B. Ramenghi;G. Ballardini;L. Zonta;A. Martini
通讯作者：
A. Ravelli;J. Wisnieski;B. Ramenghi;G. Ballardini;L. Zonta;A. Martini