Zihao Wan1, Chien-Wei Lee2, Shuai Yuan3, Oscar Kuang-Shen Lee4. 1. MD. Doctoral Student, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 2. PhD. Research Associate Professor, Institute for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong; and Research Associate Professor, School of Biomedical Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 3. MSc. Doctoral Student, Cardiovascular and Nutritional Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong; Professor, Institute for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong; and Professor, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumor protein p63 (p63) has been reported to be highly expressed in giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB). Whether p63 can be treated as a diagnostic marker for GCTB remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the applicability of p63 in diagnosing GCTB. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis carried out in a public hospital, Hong Kong, China. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 30, 2019. Literature in English or Chinese about the differential diagnosis of GCTB using p63 were included. -Animal experiments, reviews, correspondence, case reports, expert opinions and editorials were excluded. Studies were also excluded if they did not provide sufficient information to construct a 2 × 2 contingency table. We calculated individual and pooled sensitivities and specificities. We used I² as an indicator of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Out of 88 records identified, 8 articles on 788 GCTB patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the present analysis. Bivariate analyses yielded a pooled mean sensitivity of 0.87 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.72-0.95) and specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.56-0.82) for using p63 as a biomarker in diagnosing GCTB. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). CONCLUSION: p63 is a helpful indicator in diagnosing GCTB due to its high sensitivity and specificity. -Nonetheless, the results need to be carefully interpreted based on other diagnostic methods such as imaging. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: 164115 (PROSPERO registration number).
BACKGROUND: Tumor protein p63 (p63) has been reported to be highly expressed in giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB). Whether p63 can be treated as a diagnostic marker for GCTB remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the applicability of p63 in diagnosing GCTB. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis carried out in a public hospital, Hong Kong, China. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 30, 2019. Literature in English or Chinese about the differential diagnosis of GCTB using p63 were included. -Animal experiments, reviews, correspondence, case reports, expert opinions and editorials were excluded. Studies were also excluded if they did not provide sufficient information to construct a 2 × 2 contingency table. We calculated individual and pooled sensitivities and specificities. We used I² as an indicator of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Out of 88 records identified, 8 articles on 788 GCTB patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the present analysis. Bivariate analyses yielded a pooled mean sensitivity of 0.87 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.72-0.95) and specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.56-0.82) for using p63 as a biomarker in diagnosing GCTB. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). CONCLUSION: p63 is a helpful indicator in diagnosing GCTB due to its high sensitivity and specificity. -Nonetheless, the results need to be carefully interpreted based on other diagnostic methods such as imaging. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: 164115 (PROSPERO registration number).