Monokine induced by gamma interferon for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis: A diagnostic meta-analysis.
Journal
Medicine
ISSN: 1536-5964
Titre abrégé: Medicine (Baltimore)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985248R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Nov 2020
20 Nov 2020
Historique:
entrez:
21
11
2020
pubmed:
22
11
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) is an oldest-known and most formidable disease. The standard microbiology culture is time-wasting. Monokine induced by gamma interferon (MIG) has been reported as a new biomarker to auxiliarily detect PTB. In our study, we used meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic value of MIG for PTB. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for relative records up to April 2, 2020. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve were estimated. Eight studies including 1487 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of MIG for detecting PTB were 84%, 84%, 5.19, and 0.19, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve were 27.88 and 0.90, respectively, indicating a good diagnostic ability of MIG. Meta-regression analysis showed that human immunodeficiency virus status might be a source of heterogeneity (P = .02). Our results showed that MIG had a good diagnostic value for PTB.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUNDS
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) is an oldest-known and most formidable disease. The standard microbiology culture is time-wasting. Monokine induced by gamma interferon (MIG) has been reported as a new biomarker to auxiliarily detect PTB. In our study, we used meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic value of MIG for PTB.
METHODS
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for relative records up to April 2, 2020. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve were estimated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Eight studies including 1487 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of MIG for detecting PTB were 84%, 84%, 5.19, and 0.19, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve were 27.88 and 0.90, respectively, indicating a good diagnostic ability of MIG. Meta-regression analysis showed that human immunodeficiency virus status might be a source of heterogeneity (P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that MIG had a good diagnostic value for PTB.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33217864
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023302
pii: 00005792-202011200-00079
pmc: PMC7676613
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
CXCL9 protein, human
0
Chemokine CXCL9
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e23302Références
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jun 24;58(7):
pubmed: 32295893
PLoS Med. 2020 May 1;17(5):e1003113
pubmed: 32357197
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 15;13(3):e0192664
pubmed: 29543810
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Chest. 2014 Aug;146(2):283-291
pubmed: 24577604
J Infect. 2019 Sep;79(3):228-235
pubmed: 31319143
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jul 1;73(1):115-120
pubmed: 32296830
Lancet HIV. 2018 Sep;5(9):e515-e523
pubmed: 30139576
BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Oct 30;13:507
pubmed: 24172543
Stat Med. 2014 Jul 20;33(16):2701-17
pubmed: 24903142
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2015 Dec;19(12):1476-84
pubmed: 26614189
Oncotarget. 2016 Sep 6;7(36):57581-57592
pubmed: 27557501
Eur Respir J. 2014 Aug;44(2):435-46
pubmed: 24696113
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2009 Nov;104(7):1039-41
pubmed: 20027475
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120
J Infect Dev Ctries. 2018 Jun 30;12(6):429-441
pubmed: 31940294
Stat Med. 2009 Sep 20;28(21):2653-68
pubmed: 19591118
Int J Infect Dis. 2018 Oct;75:67-73
pubmed: 30125689
J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Sep;58(9):882-93
pubmed: 16085191
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Oct 30;19(1):924
pubmed: 31666025
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2020 Mar;121:101917
pubmed: 32279873
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Jul 1;184(1):132-40
pubmed: 21493734
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):529-36
pubmed: 22007046
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Mar;110(3):148-50
pubmed: 26884490
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;95:246-252
pubmed: 32247825
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002 Jul 03;2:9
pubmed: 12097142
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Apr;8(4):407-419
pubmed: 32178775
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2012 Nov;92(6):513-20
pubmed: 22824465
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2015 Feb;19(2):191-9
pubmed: 25574918
J Mol Diagn. 2015 Jan;17(1):90-9
pubmed: 25528189
Eur Respir J. 2014 May;43(5):1472-86
pubmed: 24311770