Cargando…

The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of stool DNA testing for colorectal cancer (CRC) and compare the performance between single-gene and multiple-gene tests. MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using keywords colorectal cancers, stool/fecal, sensitivi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhai, Rong-Lin, Xu, Fei, Zhang, Pei, Zhang, Wan-Li, Wang, Hui, Wang, Ji-Liang, Cai, Kai-Lin, Long, Yue-Ping, Lu, Xiao-Ming, Tao, Kai-Xiong, Wang, Guo-Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748866/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26844449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002129
_version_ 1782415190079307776
author Zhai, Rong-Lin
Xu, Fei
Zhang, Pei
Zhang, Wan-Li
Wang, Hui
Wang, Ji-Liang
Cai, Kai-Lin
Long, Yue-Ping
Lu, Xiao-Ming
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Wang, Guo-Bin
author_facet Zhai, Rong-Lin
Xu, Fei
Zhang, Pei
Zhang, Wan-Li
Wang, Hui
Wang, Ji-Liang
Cai, Kai-Lin
Long, Yue-Ping
Lu, Xiao-Ming
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Wang, Guo-Bin
author_sort Zhai, Rong-Lin
collection PubMed
description This meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of stool DNA testing for colorectal cancer (CRC) and compare the performance between single-gene and multiple-gene tests. MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using keywords colorectal cancers, stool/fecal, sensitivity, specificity, DNA, and screening. Sensitivity analysis, quality assessments, and performance bias were performed for the included studies. Fifty-three studies were included in the analysis with a total sample size of 7524 patients. The studies were heterogeneous with regard to the genes being analyzed for fecal genetic biomarkers of CRC, as well as the laboratory methods being used for each assay. The sensitivity of the different assays ranged from 2% to 100% and the specificity ranged from 81% to 100%. The meta-analysis found that the pooled sensitivities for single- and multigene assays were 48.0% and 77.8%, respectively, while the pooled specificities were 97.0% and 92.7%. Receiver operator curves and diagnostic odds ratios showed no significant difference between both tests with regard to sensitivity or specificity. This meta-analysis revealed that using assays that evaluated multiple genes compared with single-gene assays did not increase the sensitivity or specificity of stool DNA testing in detecting CRC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4748866
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47488662016-04-01 The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Zhai, Rong-Lin Xu, Fei Zhang, Pei Zhang, Wan-Li Wang, Hui Wang, Ji-Liang Cai, Kai-Lin Long, Yue-Ping Lu, Xiao-Ming Tao, Kai-Xiong Wang, Guo-Bin Medicine (Baltimore) 4100 This meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of stool DNA testing for colorectal cancer (CRC) and compare the performance between single-gene and multiple-gene tests. MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using keywords colorectal cancers, stool/fecal, sensitivity, specificity, DNA, and screening. Sensitivity analysis, quality assessments, and performance bias were performed for the included studies. Fifty-three studies were included in the analysis with a total sample size of 7524 patients. The studies were heterogeneous with regard to the genes being analyzed for fecal genetic biomarkers of CRC, as well as the laboratory methods being used for each assay. The sensitivity of the different assays ranged from 2% to 100% and the specificity ranged from 81% to 100%. The meta-analysis found that the pooled sensitivities for single- and multigene assays were 48.0% and 77.8%, respectively, while the pooled specificities were 97.0% and 92.7%. Receiver operator curves and diagnostic odds ratios showed no significant difference between both tests with regard to sensitivity or specificity. This meta-analysis revealed that using assays that evaluated multiple genes compared with single-gene assays did not increase the sensitivity or specificity of stool DNA testing in detecting CRC. Wolters Kluwer Health 2016-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4748866/ /pubmed/26844449 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002129 Text en Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0, where it is permissible to download, share and reproduce the work in any medium, provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
spellingShingle 4100
Zhai, Rong-Lin
Xu, Fei
Zhang, Pei
Zhang, Wan-Li
Wang, Hui
Wang, Ji-Liang
Cai, Kai-Lin
Long, Yue-Ping
Lu, Xiao-Ming
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Wang, Guo-Bin
The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short The Diagnostic Performance of Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort diagnostic performance of stool dna testing for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic 4100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748866/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26844449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002129
work_keys_str_mv AT zhaironglin thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xufei thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangpei thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangwanli thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wanghui thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangjiliang thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caikailin thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT longyueping thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT luxiaoming thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT taokaixiong thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangguobin thediagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhaironglin diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xufei diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangpei diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhangwanli diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wanghui diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangjiliang diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caikailin diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT longyueping diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT luxiaoming diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT taokaixiong diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangguobin diagnosticperformanceofstooldnatestingforcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis