Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Diagnostic accuracy of E-cadherin for malignanteffusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  1. Fangying Chen1,2,
  2. Luqi Dai1,
  3. Jing An1,
  4. Ni Zeng1,
  5. Lei Chen1,
  6. Yongchun Shen1
  1. 1Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital, West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
  2. 2Department of Tuberculosis, The Third People’s Hospital of Tibet Autonomous Region, Lhasa, Tibet, China
  1. Correspondence to DrLeiChen, Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital, West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China; lchens{at}126.com; DrYongchunShen, Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital, West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China; shen_yongchun{at}126.com

Abstract

Background The differential diagnosis of malignant effusion remains a clinical challenge. We aim to summarise all relevant literature studies in order to determine the overall clinical value of E-cadherin in the diagnosis of malignant effusion by meta-analysis.

Methods PubMed, the Cochrane Library Database, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science, CNKI, WANFANG and WEIPU databases are thoroughly searched up to 15 March2018. The calculated pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic OR(DOR) and the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curvewere plotted.

Results A total of 15 studies were included in the analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of E-cadherin in the diagnosis of malignant effusion were determined to be high, with a sensitivity of 0.83(95%CI0.79 to 0.87) and a specificity of 0.96(95%CI0.90 to 0.98). The positive LR was determined to be 21.10(95%CI 8.54 to 52.11), the negative LR was determined to be 0.17(95% CI 0.14 to 0.22) and the DOR was determined to be 121.34(95%CI 49.11 to 299.80). The SROC curve exhibited a high overall diagnostic, with the area under the curve measured to be 0.91(95% CI 0.89 to 0.93). Subgroup analysis showed the method (cell blocks or smears), sample size (≥100 or<100), geographical location (Asia, Europe or USA) and impact factor of each article (≥3 or<3) were not the sources of overall heterogeneity.

Conclusion E-cadherin exhibits very good diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis for malignant effusion; thus, it can be helpful in the process of clinical decisions.

  • E-cadherin
  • effusion
  • diagnosis
  • systematic review
  • meta-analysis
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • FC, LD and JA contributed equally.

  • Contributors Conception and design: FC, JA and LD. Administrative support, guarantor of the paper, revised the manuscript, taking responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole: LC and YS. Collection and assembly of data: JA and NZ. Systematic review, meta-analysis and interpretation: FC and LD. Manuscript writing: all authors. Final approval of manuscript: all authors.

  • Funding This work was supported in part by grant 2016YFC0901100 from the National Key Research and Development Program of China and grant 2017SZ0120 from the Key Research Development Program of Sichuan Province.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement There are no data in this work.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.