| Literature DB >> 28413722 |
Qianqian Liu1,2, Wenzhang Li3, Yunfeng Chen1, Xinmiao Du2, Chengdi Wang2, Binmiao Liang2, Yin Tang4,5, Yulin Feng2, Chuanmin Tao6, Jian-Qing He2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic values of interferon-gamma release assays (IGRA) in tuberculosis (TB) vary a lot with different site of infections, with especially higher sensitivities in chronic forms of TB such as tuberculosis of the lymph node. We conducted a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the overall accuracy of diagnostic IGRA for tuberculous lymphadenitis.Entities:
Keywords: Diagnosis; Interferon-gamma release assay; Meta-analysis; Tuberculous lymphadenitis
Year: 2017 PMID: 28413722 PMCID: PMC5391793 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.3136
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Flow diagram of included studies.
Characteristics of studies included in meta-analysis.
| First author | Language | Year | Country | IGRA method | Sample size | TP | FP | FN | TN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim KH | English | 2016 | Korea | QuantiFERON-TB | 244 | 34 | 9 | 8 | 193 |
| Kim YK | English | 2011 | Korea | QuantiFERON-TB | 108 | 25 | 13 | 2 | 68 |
| Song KH | English | 2009 | Korea | QuantiFERON-TB | 44 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 20 |
| Jia H | English | 2016 | China | T-SPOT.TB | 365 | 75 | 79 | 8 | 203 |
| Cho OH | English | 2011 | Korea | T-SPOT.TB | 64 | 48 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Liao CH | English | 2009 | China | T-SPOT.TB | 25 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Shin JA | English | 2015 | Korea | QuantiFERON-TB | 16 | 9 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Kim JK | Korean | 2013 | Korea | QuantiFERON-TB | 43 | 17 | 11 | 3 | 12 |
| Lu X | Chinese | 2016 | China | T-SPOT.TB | 19 | 14 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Jia HY | Chinese | 2014 | China | T-SPOT.TB | 156 | 47 | 22 | 4 | 83 |
Notes.
interferon-γ release assay
false negative
false positive
true negative
true positive
Quality assessment of the eligible studies by QUADAS-2.
| Study | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient selection | Index test | Reference standard | Flow and timing | Patient selection | Index test | Reference standard | |
| 1 | Unkown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 2 | Unkown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 3 | Unkown | Unknown | High | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 4 | High | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 5 | Unkown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 6 | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 7 | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 8 | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 9 | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| 10 | High | Unknown | Unknown | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Figure 2Forest plot evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic performance of IGRA in tuberculous lymphadenitis.
CI, confidence interval. (A) Sensivitity; (B) Specificity.
Figure 3Summary receiver operator characteristics (SROC) of IGRA on summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity.
AUC, area under the curve; SE, standard error
Subgroup analyses.
| Subgroup | Studies | Sensitivity | Specificity | PLR | NLR | AUC | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | Pooled value | Pooled value | Pooled value | Pooled value | Pooled value | |||||
| T-SPOT.TB | 5 | 0.91(0.86–0.94) | 0.90 | 0.74(0.69–0.78) | 0.54 | 3.37(2.85–4.00) | 0.48 | 0.13(0.09–0.21) | 0.78 | 0.98(0.03) |
| QuantiFERON-TB | 5 | 0.85(0.78–0.91) | 0.73 | 0.89(0.85–0.92) | <0.10 | 5.53(2.11–14.52) | <0.10 | 0.19(0.12–0.29) | 0.72 | 0.92(0.02) |
| Korean | 6 | 0.86(0.80–0.91) | 0.77 | 0.88(0.84–0.91) | <0.10 | 4.71(2.08–10.67) | <0.10 | 0.19(0.13–0.28) | 0.84 | 0.92(0.02) |
| Chinese | 4 | 0.91(0.86–0.95) | 0.85 | 0.74(0.69–0.78) | 0.53 | 3.45(2.90–4.11) | 0.50 | 0.12(0.07–0.20) | 0.80 | 0.96(0.13) |
| Cervical TBL | 3 | 0.83(0.73–0.90) | 0.86 | 0.91(0.86–0.94) | <0.10 | 5.89(1.08–31.93) | <0.10 | 0.21(0.13–0.33) | 0.77 | 0.91(0.03) |
| Not limit to Cervical TBL | 7 | 0.90(0.86–0.94) | 0.92 | 0.75(0.71–0.79) | 0.29 | 3.72(2.97–4.66) | 0.29 | 0.14(0.09–0.20) | 0.82 | 0.95(0.04) |
Notes.
positive likelihood ratio
negative likelihood ratio
area under the curve
Tuberculous lymphadenitis
Figure 4Deeks’ funnel plots for publication bias.