Amir Hossein Aalami1, Farnoosh Aalami2. 1. Department of Biology, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, 9187147578, Mashhad, Iran. amir.h.aalami@mshdiau.ac.ir. 2. Student Research Committee, Faculty of Medicine, North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a technique that uses fluorescently labeled DNA probes. Many studies have evaluated the ROC curve (sensitivity and specificity) with the FISH method to diagnose upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). The current meta-analysis was performed to examine the diagnostic power of the FISH method in UTUC. METHODS: We reviewed databases and methodically obtained papers for analysis until April 25th, 2022. The Meta-disc V.1.4 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.3.3 software calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve (AUC), and summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC). The I2 and Chi-square tests were used to examine the heterogeneity. Finally, the publication bias was estimated using Begg's and Egger's tests. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles included 1,067 participants (439 cases and 628 controls). The overall pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.76), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97), 10.42 (95% CI 5.84-18.60), 0.29 (95% CI 0.21-0.40), 38.55 (95% CI 18.58-79.96), and 0.91, respectively. No publication bias was reported based on Begg's and Egger's tests (Begg's p = 0.200; Egger's p = 0.151). CONCLUSION: This paper clearly shows that the high specificity and acceptable sensitivity of the FISH method make it a promising diagnostic method for UTUC in urine samples. However, further research with higher statistical numbers is needed to strengthen the correlation and be used for diagnostic applications.
BACKGROUND: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a technique that uses fluorescently labeled DNA probes. Many studies have evaluated the ROC curve (sensitivity and specificity) with the FISH method to diagnose upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). The current meta-analysis was performed to examine the diagnostic power of the FISH method in UTUC. METHODS: We reviewed databases and methodically obtained papers for analysis until April 25th, 2022. The Meta-disc V.1.4 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.3.3 software calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve (AUC), and summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC). The I2 and Chi-square tests were used to examine the heterogeneity. Finally, the publication bias was estimated using Begg's and Egger's tests. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles included 1,067 participants (439 cases and 628 controls). The overall pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.76), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97), 10.42 (95% CI 5.84-18.60), 0.29 (95% CI 0.21-0.40), 38.55 (95% CI 18.58-79.96), and 0.91, respectively. No publication bias was reported based on Begg's and Egger's tests (Begg's p = 0.200; Egger's p = 0.151). CONCLUSION: This paper clearly shows that the high specificity and acceptable sensitivity of the FISH method make it a promising diagnostic method for UTUC in urine samples. However, further research with higher statistical numbers is needed to strengthen the correlation and be used for diagnostic applications.
Authors: Morgan Rouprêt; Marko Babjuk; Maximilian Burger; Otakar Capoun; Daniel Cohen; Eva M Compérat; Nigel C Cowan; Jose L Dominguez-Escrig; Paolo Gontero; A Hugh Mostafid; Joan Palou; Benoit Peyronnet; Thomas Seisen; Viktor Soukup; Richard J Sylvester; Bas W G van Rhijn; Richard Zigeuner; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Judith Stangl-Kremser; Gianluca Muto; Antonio Andrea Grosso; Alberto Briganti; Eva Comperat; Fabrizio Di Maida; Rodolfo Montironi; Mesut Remzi; Benjamin Pradere; Francesco Soria; Simone Albisinni; Morgan Roupret; Shahrokh Francois Shariat; Andrea Minervini; Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh; Marco Moschini; Alessia Cimadamore; Andrea Mari Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2022-02-28 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Jennifer Y Ju; Anne M Mills; Mani S Mahadevan; Jinbo Fan; Stephen H Culp; Martha H Thomas; Helen P Cathro Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Francesco Soria; Shahrokh F Shariat; Seth P Lerner; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Michael Rink; Wassim Kassouf; Philippe E Spiess; Yair Lotan; Dingwei Ye; Mario I Fernández; Eiji Kikuchi; Daher C Chade; Marko Babjuk; Arthur P Grollman; George N Thalmann Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-09-07 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jeffrey J Leow; Yew Lam Chong; Steven L Chang; Begoña P Valderrama; Thomas Powles; Joaquim Bellmunt Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 20.096