| Literature DB >> 30340615 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The measurement of cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP) has become a novel way for the diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, no conclusive correlation has been drawn between COMP and knee OA. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of serum COMP as biomarker for knee OA and its relation with disease severity.Entities:
Keywords: Cartilage oligomeric matrix protein; Kellgren-Lawrence; Knee osteoarthritis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30340615 PMCID: PMC6195708 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-018-0959-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1Flow diagram of study selection
Characteristics of included studies for COMP
| Author | Group |
| Age (years) | Female ( | BMI (kg/m2) | Region | K-L 0~4 of patients ( | ELISA manufacture information | Type of ELISA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clark1999 | Control | 148 | 60 ± 20 | 144 | USA | K-L 0 = 148, K-L2 = 109 | In-house method | Competitive | |
| OA | 143 | 60 ± 20 | |||||||
| Das Gupta E2017 | Control | 30 | 62.5 ± 12 | 15 | 25.01 ± 6.31 | Malaysia | K-L 2 = 30 | R&D Systems | Solid-phase sandwich |
| OA | 60 | 57.5 ± 9 | 46 | 26.72 ± 5.35 | |||||
| Fernandes2007 | Control | 40 | 53.8 ± 8.5 | 24 | Brazil | K-L 0,1 = 40 | AnaMar Medical (Uppsala, Sweden) | Sandwich | |
| OA | 75 | 56.6 ± 7.6 | 51 | ||||||
| Jordan JM2003 | Control | 302 | 63.3 ± 10.8 | 258 | 31.5 ± 7.4 | USA | K-L 0 = 302, K-L 2 = 313, K-L 3 = 110, K-L 4 = 44 | AnaMar Medical (Lund, Sweden) | Sandwich |
| OA | 467 | 60.6 ± 9.6 | 190 | 28.9 ± 6.1 | |||||
| Li2012 | Control | 35 | 53 ± 12.53 | 19 | 21.8 ± 4.9 | China | K-L 1 = 28, K-L 2 = 36, K-L 3 = 27, K-L 4 = 24 | AnaMar Medical AB (Lund, Sweden) | Sandwich |
| OA | 115 | 55 ± 13.32 | 60 | 22.3 ± 5.7 | |||||
| Mündermann A2009 | Control | 41 | 57.5 ± 7 | 20 | 25.7 ± 4.2 | USA | K-L 1 = 11, K-L 2 = 7, K-L 3 = 12, K-L 4 = 12 | AnaMar Medical AB (Lund, Sweden) | Sandwich |
| OA | 42 | 60.7 ± 8.6 | 22 | 27.0 ± 3.8 | |||||
| Author | Group | N | Age (years) | Female ( | BMI (kg/m2) | Region | K-L 0~4 of patients (n) | ELISA manufacture information | Type of ELISA |
| Senolt L2005 | Control | 38 | 58.3 ± 9.1 | 23 | Czech Republic | K-L 1 = 2, K-L 2 = 18 | In-house method | Sandwich | |
| OA | 38 | 64.1 ± 10.1 | 25 | ||||||
| Sowers MF2009 | Control | 36 | 47.5 ± 2.6 | 36 | 29.7 ± 6.2 | France | K-L 0,1 = 36 | AnaMar Medical (COMPTM ELISA kit) | A two-site ELISA |
| OA | 36 | 47.5 ± 2.6 | 36 | 39.15 ± 8.22 | |||||
| Wakitani2007 | Control | 24 | 20–54 | 8 | Japan | K-L 1 = 7, K-L 2 = 4 | Kamiya Biomedical | Sandwich | |
| OA | 24 | 40–80 | 20 |
COMP cartilage oligomeric matrix protein, K-L Kellgren-Lawrence classification, ELISA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Fig. 2Forest plot of the standardized mean difference of serum COMP in patients with knee OA compared with controls. A positive standardized mean difference represents a higher serum COMP levels in the knee OA patients compared with controls
Subgroup analysis of serum COMP with different unit of measure and disease severity
| Subgroups | Number of study | Mean difference | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit of measure | ||||
| U/L | 3 | 2.13 | 0.11, 4.16 | 0.04 |
| μg/ml | 6 | 1.00 | 0.37, 1.63 | 0.002 |
| Disease severity | ||||
| K-L 1 VS K-L 2 | 3 | 0.79 | 0.34, 1.25 | 0.0007 |
| K-L 1 VS K-L 3 | 3 | 1.08 | 0.44, 2.60 | 0.16 |
| K-L 1 VS K-L 4 | 3 | 1.61 | 0.57, 2.65 | 0.002 |
| K-L 2 VS K-L 3 | 6 | 0.44 | 0.04, 0.85 | 0.03 |
| K-L 2 VS K-L 4 | 7 | 0.61 | 0.17, 1.05 | 0.007 |
| K-L 3 VS K-L 4 | 5 | 0.41 | 0.15, 0.68 | 0.002 |
K-L Kellgren-Lawrence classification, CI confidence intervals
Fig. 3Forest plot of the standardized mean difference of serum COMP in patients with K-L grades 1–4 knee OA compared with controls. A positive standardized mean difference represents a higher serum COMP levels in the knee OA patients compared with controls