Cargando…

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: Midkine (MDK) has been proposed as one of the most promising markers for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic accuracy of MDK and α-fetoprotein (AFP) for HCC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid/EMBASE, and the Coc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lu, Qingqing, Li, Jie, Cao, Hui, Lv, Chenlu, Wang, Xiaolin, Cao, Shiqiong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Portland Press Ltd. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7087326/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039435
http://dx.doi.org/10.1042/BSR20192424
_version_ 1783509317562925056
author Lu, Qingqing
Li, Jie
Cao, Hui
Lv, Chenlu
Wang, Xiaolin
Cao, Shiqiong
author_facet Lu, Qingqing
Li, Jie
Cao, Hui
Lv, Chenlu
Wang, Xiaolin
Cao, Shiqiong
author_sort Lu, Qingqing
collection PubMed
description Objective: Midkine (MDK) has been proposed as one of the most promising markers for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic accuracy of MDK and α-fetoprotein (AFP) for HCC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid/EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for all relevant studies up to 18 May 2019. The Revised Quality Assessment for Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy tool (QUADAS-2) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) of MDK and AFP for detecting HCC were pooled using random-effects model. Results: Seventeen studies from five articles with a total of 1122 HCC patients and 2483 controls were included. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting HCC were as follows: sensitivity, 85 vs 52%, specificity, 82 vs 94%, and AUC, 0.90 vs 0.83. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting hepatitis virus-related HCC as follows: sensitivity, 93 vs 74%, specificity, 85 vs 97%, and AUC, 0.95 vs 0.97. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting early-stage HCC were as follows: sensitivity, 83.5 vs 44.4%, specificity, 81.7 vs 84.8%, and AUC, 0.87 vs 0.52. The summary estimates using MDK for detecting AFP-negative HCC as follows: sensitivity, 88.5%, specificity, 83.9%, and AUC, 0.91. Conclusion: MDK is more accurate than AFP in diagnosing HCC, especially for early-stage HCC and AFP-negative HCC. Both MDK and AFP had excellent diagnostic performance for hepatitis virus-related HCC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7087326
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Portland Press Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70873262020-04-21 Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis Lu, Qingqing Li, Jie Cao, Hui Lv, Chenlu Wang, Xiaolin Cao, Shiqiong Biosci Rep Cancer Objective: Midkine (MDK) has been proposed as one of the most promising markers for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic accuracy of MDK and α-fetoprotein (AFP) for HCC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid/EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for all relevant studies up to 18 May 2019. The Revised Quality Assessment for Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy tool (QUADAS-2) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) of MDK and AFP for detecting HCC were pooled using random-effects model. Results: Seventeen studies from five articles with a total of 1122 HCC patients and 2483 controls were included. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting HCC were as follows: sensitivity, 85 vs 52%, specificity, 82 vs 94%, and AUC, 0.90 vs 0.83. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting hepatitis virus-related HCC as follows: sensitivity, 93 vs 74%, specificity, 85 vs 97%, and AUC, 0.95 vs 0.97. The summary estimates using MDK and AFP for detecting early-stage HCC were as follows: sensitivity, 83.5 vs 44.4%, specificity, 81.7 vs 84.8%, and AUC, 0.87 vs 0.52. The summary estimates using MDK for detecting AFP-negative HCC as follows: sensitivity, 88.5%, specificity, 83.9%, and AUC, 0.91. Conclusion: MDK is more accurate than AFP in diagnosing HCC, especially for early-stage HCC and AFP-negative HCC. Both MDK and AFP had excellent diagnostic performance for hepatitis virus-related HCC. Portland Press Ltd. 2020-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7087326/ /pubmed/32039435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1042/BSR20192424 Text en © 2020 The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article published by Portland Press Limited on behalf of the Biochemical Society and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY).
spellingShingle Cancer
Lu, Qingqing
Li, Jie
Cao, Hui
Lv, Chenlu
Wang, Xiaolin
Cao, Shiqiong
Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Midkine and AFP for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of diagnostic accuracy of midkine and afp for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7087326/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039435
http://dx.doi.org/10.1042/BSR20192424
work_keys_str_mv AT luqingqing comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lijie comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caohui comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lvchenlu comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangxiaolin comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caoshiqiong comparisonofdiagnosticaccuracyofmidkineandafpfordetectinghepatocellularcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis