Qinghui Zhang1, Jiahuang Huang1, Yajun He2, Runze Cao3, Jianchang Shu4. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital Affiliated to Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510220, Guangdong, China. 2. Department of Clinical Laboratory, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital Affiliated to Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510220, Guangdong, China. 3. Department of Emergency, Xiangyang No. 1 People's Hospital Affiliated to Hubei University of Medicine, Xiangyang, 441000, Hubei, China. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital Affiliated to Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510220, Guangdong, China. shujc_jnu@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: An increasing number of studies have shown that insulinoma-associated protein 1 (INSM1) is a robust marker for the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NEN). The overall diagnostic accuracy of INSM1 for GEP-NEN remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to estimate the diagnostic value of INSM1 for GEP-NEN through a meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched relevant studies addressing the accuracy of INSM1 in the diagnosis of GEP-NEN from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) as well as from reference lists since the establishment of the database to January 12, 2021. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were used to comprehensively evaluate the diagnostic value of INSM1 for GEP-NEN. Statistical analysis was performed by Stata 15.0 and RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Nine studies with a total of 393 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed that the pooled sensitivity and specificity of INSM1 for the diagnosis of GEP-NEN were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.87-1.00) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98), respectively. The PLR and NLR were 23.3 (95% CI: 13.3-40.8) and 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.14), respectively. The DOR was 380.31 (95% CI: 164.14-881.21), and the area under the curve (AUC) of SROC curve was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results show that INSM1 is an effective marker for the diagnosis of GEP-NEN with high sensitivity and specificity. INSM1 is recommended for clinical application to improve the diagnostic accuracy of GEP-NEN. However, more high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.
PURPOSE: An increasing number of studies have shown that insulinoma-associated protein 1 (INSM1) is a robust marker for the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NEN). The overall diagnostic accuracy of INSM1 for GEP-NEN remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to estimate the diagnostic value of INSM1 for GEP-NEN through a meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched relevant studies addressing the accuracy of INSM1 in the diagnosis of GEP-NEN from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) as well as from reference lists since the establishment of the database to January 12, 2021. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were used to comprehensively evaluate the diagnostic value of INSM1 for GEP-NEN. Statistical analysis was performed by Stata 15.0 and RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: Nine studies with a total of 393 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed that the pooled sensitivity and specificity of INSM1 for the diagnosis of GEP-NEN were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.87-1.00) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98), respectively. The PLR and NLR were 23.3 (95% CI: 13.3-40.8) and 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.14), respectively. The DOR was 380.31 (95% CI: 164.14-881.21), and the area under the curve (AUC) of SROC curve was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results show that INSM1 is an effective marker for the diagnosis of GEP-NEN with high sensitivity and specificity. INSM1 is recommended for clinical application to improve the diagnostic accuracy of GEP-NEN. However, more high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Authors: Penny F Whiting; Anne W S Rutjes; Marie E Westwood; Susan Mallett; Jonathan J Deeks; Johannes B Reitsma; Mariska M G Leeflang; Jonathan A C Sterne; Patrick M M Bossuyt Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Arvind Dasari; Chan Shen; Daniel Halperin; Bo Zhao; Shouhao Zhou; Ying Xu; Tina Shih; James C Yao Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 31.777