-
Transplantation Reviews (Orlando, Fla.) Jul 2023We aimed to evaluate the utility of BNP and NT-proBNP in identifying adverse recipient outcomes following cardiac transplantation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Diagnostic accuracy of brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal-pro brain natriuretic peptide to detect complications of cardiac transplantation in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
We aimed to evaluate the utility of BNP and NT-proBNP in identifying adverse recipient outcomes following cardiac transplantation.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023. We included studies reporting associations between BNP or NT-proBNP and adverse outcomes following cardiac transplantation in adults. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI); or confusion matrices with sensitivities and specificities. Where meta-analysis was inappropriate, studies were analysed descriptively.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies involving 2,297 cardiac transplantation recipients were included. We report no significant association between BNP or NT-proBNP and significant acute cellular rejection of grade 3A or higher (SMD 0.40, 95% CI -0.06-0.86) as defined by the latest 2004 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines. We also report no strong associations between BNP or NT-proBNP and cardiac allograft vasculopathy or antibody mediated rejection.
CONCLUSION
In isolation, serum BNP and NT-proBNP lack sufficient sensitivity and specificity to reliably predict adverse outcomes following cardiac transplantation.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; Peptide Fragments; Heart Transplantation; Heart; Biomarkers
PubMed: 37433240
DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2023.100774 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Nov 2023Adding additional specimen types (eg, serology or sputum) to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) increases respiratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Adding additional specimen types (eg, serology or sputum) to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) increases respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) detection among adults. We assessed if a similar increase occurs in children and quantified underascertainment associated with diagnostic testing.
METHODS
We searched databases for studies involving RSV detection in persons <18 years using ≥2 specimen types or tests. We assessed study quality using a validated checklist. We pooled detection rates by specimen and diagnostic tests and quantified performance.
RESULTS
We included 157 studies. Added testing of additional specimens to NP aspirate (NPA), NPS, and/or nasal swab (NS) RT-PCR resulted in statistically nonsignificant increases in RSV detection. Adding paired serology testing increased RSV detection by 10%, NS by 8%, oropharyngeal swabs by 5%, and NPS by 1%. Compared to RT-PCR, direct fluorescence antibody tests, viral culture, and rapid antigen tests were 87%, 76%, and 74% sensitive, respectively (pooled specificities all ≥98%). Pooled sensitivity of multiplex versus singleplex RT-PCR was 96%.
CONCLUSIONS
RT-PCR was the most sensitive pediatric RSV diagnostic test. Adding multiple specimens did not substantially increase RSV detection, but even small proportional increases could result in meaningful changes in burden estimates. The synergistic effect of adding multiple specimens should be evaluated.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; Sensitivity and Specificity; Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human; Viruses; Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Nasopharynx; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
PubMed: 37285396
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiad185 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2023As countries move towards or achieve measles elimination status, serosurveillance is an important public health tool. However, a major challenge of serosurveillance is...
Comparison of measles IgG enzyme immunoassays (EIA) versus plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) for measuring measles serostatus: a systematic review of head-to-head analyses of measles IgG EIA and PRNT.
BACKGROUND
As countries move towards or achieve measles elimination status, serosurveillance is an important public health tool. However, a major challenge of serosurveillance is finding a feasible, accurate, cost-effective, and high throughput assay to measure measles antibody concentrations and estimate susceptibility in a population. We conducted a systematic review to assess, characterize, and - to the extent possible - quantify the performance of measles IgG enzyme-linked assays (EIAs) compared to the gold standard, plaque reduction neutralization tests (PRNT).
METHODS
We followed the PRISMA statement for a systematic literature search and methods for conducting and reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses recommended by the Cochrane Screening and Diagnostic Tests Methods Group. We identified studies through PubMed and Embase electronic databases and included serologic studies detecting measles virus IgG antibodies among participants of any age from the same source population that reported an index (any EIA or multiple bead-based assays, MBA) and reference test (PRNT) using sera, whole blood, or plasma. Measures of diagnostic accuracy with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were abstracted for each study result, where reported.
RESULTS
We identified 550 unique publications and identified 36 eligible studies for analysis. We classified studies as high, medium, or low quality; results from high quality studies are reported. Because most high quality studies used the Siemens Enzygnost EIA kit, we generate individual and pooled diagnostic accuracy estimates for this assay separately. Median sensitivity of the Enzygnost EIA was 92.1% [IQR = 82.3, 95.7]; median specificity was 96.9 [93.0, 100.0]. Pooled sensitivity and specificity from studies using the Enzygnost kit were 91.6 (95%CI: 80.7,96.6) and 96.0 (95%CI: 90.9,98.3), respectively. The sensitivity of all other EIA kits across high quality studies ranged from 0% to 98.9% with median (IQR) = 90.6 [86.6, 95.2]; specificity ranged from 58.8% to 100.0% with median (IQR) = 100.0 [88.7, 100.0].
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of currently available measles IgG EIAs is variable, insufficient, and may not be fit for purpose for serosurveillance goals. Additional studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of measles EIAs, including MBAs, should be conducted among diverse populations and settings (e.g., vaccination status, elimination/endemic status, age groups).
Topics: Humans; Neutralization Tests; Measles; Immunoenzyme Techniques; Measles virus; Sensitivity and Specificity; Antibodies, Viral; Immunoglobulin G
PubMed: 37259032
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08199-8 -
International Journal of Environmental... May 2023(1) Background: Immunological laboratory testing is known to be complex, and it is usually performed in tertiary referral centers. Many criticalities affect diagnostic... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Immunological laboratory testing is known to be complex, and it is usually performed in tertiary referral centers. Many criticalities affect diagnostic immunological testing, such as limited availability, the need for specifically trained laboratory staff, and potential difficulties in collecting blood samples, especially in the most vulnerable patients, i.e., the elderly and children. For this reason, the identification of a new feasible and reliable methodology for autoantibody detection is urgently needed. (2) Methods: We designed a systematic review to investigate the available literature on the utilization of saliva samples for immunological testing. (3) Results: A total of 170 articles were identified. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, accounting for 1059 patients and 671 controls. The saliva collection method was mostly represented by passive drooling (11/18, 61%), and the most frequently described methodology for antibody detection was ELISA (12/18, 67%). The analysis included 392 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 161 with systemic lupus erythematosus, 131 with type 1 diabetes mellitus, 116 with primary biliary cholangitis, 100 with pemphigus vulgaris, 50 with bullous pemphigoids, 49 with Sjogren syndrome, 39 with celiac disease, 10 with primary antiphospholipid syndromes, 8 with undifferentiated connective tissue disease, 2 with systemic sclerosis, and 1 with autoimmune thyroiditis. The majority of the reviewed studies involved adequate controls, and saliva testing allowed for a clear distinction of patients (10/12 studies, 83%). More than half of the papers showed a correlation between saliva and serum results (10/18, 55%) for autoantibody detection, with varying rates of correlation, sensitivity, and specificity. Interestingly, many papers showed a correlation between saliva antibody results and clinical manifestations. (4) Conclusions: Saliva testing might represent an appealing alternative to serum-based testing for autoantibody detection, considering the correspondence with serum testing results and the correlation with clinical manifestations. Nonetheless, standardization of sample collection processing, maintenance, and detection methodology has yet to be fully addressed.
Topics: Child; Humans; Aged; Saliva; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Sjogren's Syndrome; Autoantibodies; Arthritis, Rheumatoid
PubMed: 37239511
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20105782 -
Euro Surveillance : Bulletin Europeen... May 2023BackgroundSerological surveys have been the gold standard to estimate numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections, the dynamics of the epidemic, and disease severity. Serological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BackgroundSerological surveys have been the gold standard to estimate numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections, the dynamics of the epidemic, and disease severity. Serological assays have decaying sensitivity with time that can bias their results, but there is a lack of guidelines to account for this phenomenon for SARS-CoV-2.AimOur goal was to assess the sensitivity decay of seroassays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections, the dependence of this decay on assay characteristics, and to provide a simple method to correct for this phenomenon.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 serology studies. We included studies testing previously diagnosed, unvaccinated individuals, and excluded studies of cohorts highly unrepresentative of the general population (e.g. hospitalised patients).ResultsOf the 488 screened studies, 76 studies reporting on 50 different seroassays were included in the analysis. Sensitivity decay depended strongly on the antigen and the analytic technique used by the assay, with average sensitivities ranging between 26% and 98% at 6 months after infection, depending on assay characteristics. We found that a third of the included assays departed considerably from manufacturer specifications after 6 months.ConclusionsSeroassay sensitivity decay depends on assay characteristics, and for some types of assays, it can make manufacturer specifications highly unreliable. We provide a tool to correct for this phenomenon and to assess the risk of decay for a given assay. Our analysis can guide the design and interpretation of serosurveys for SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens and quantify systematic biases in the existing serology literature.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Sensitivity and Specificity; COVID-19 Testing; Serologic Tests; Antibodies, Viral
PubMed: 37227301
DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2023.28.21.2200809 -
International Urology and Nephrology Oct 2023Membranous nephropathy is an autoimmune nephropathy that is one of the most common pathological types of nephrotic syndrome. It is important to find and apply specific... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Membranous nephropathy is an autoimmune nephropathy that is one of the most common pathological types of nephrotic syndrome. It is important to find and apply specific biomarkers for the noninvasive diagnosis of idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN). However, there are limited data about their diagnostic value. Therefore, an overall meta-analysis helps to identify effective biomarkers for the clinical diagnosis of IMN.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science from inception until December 31, 2020. Two researchers searched for studies that met the inclusion criteria. The results of the joint study were expressed in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 24 studies with biomarkers for the clinical diagnosis of IMN, including antibody against phospholipase A2 receptor (PLAR-AB), antibody against thrombospondin type I domain-containing 7A (THSD7A-AB), lysosome membrane protein-2 (LIMP-2) and circular RNAs. The diagnostic efficiency of PLAR-AB for IMN had a combined sensitivity of 60% and a combined specificity of 100%. The diagnostic efficiency of THSD7A-AB for IMN had a combined sensitivity of 3% and a combined specificity of 99%. The diagnostic efficiency of urinary LIMP-2 for IMN was 100%, and the specificity was 100%. The diagnostic efficiency of exosomal circRNAs for IMN was 100%, and the specificity was 100%.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis shows that PLAR-AB and THSD7A-AB are of important diagnostic value for IMN. More studies are needed in the future to reveal the diagnostic value of LIMP-2 and circRNAs for IMN.
Topics: Humans; Glomerulonephritis, Membranous; RNA, Circular; Autoantibodies; Biomarkers; Polyesters; Receptors, Phospholipase A2
PubMed: 36961513
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-023-03561-w -
PloS One 2023Traditional diagnostic tests for schistosome infections are suboptimal, particularly when the parasite burden is low. In the present review we sought to identify...
Diagnostic performances of Schistosoma haematobium and Schistosoma mansoni recombinant proteins, peptides and chimeric proteins antibody based tests. Systematic scoping review.
BACKGROUND
Traditional diagnostic tests for schistosome infections are suboptimal, particularly when the parasite burden is low. In the present review we sought to identify recombinant proteins, peptides, and chimeric proteins with potential to be used as sensitive and specific diagnostic tools for schistosomiasis.
METHODS
The review was guided by PRISMA-ScR guidelines, Arksey and O'Malley's framework, and guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Five databases were searched: Cochrane library, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL, alongside preprints. Identified literature were assessed by two reviewers for inclusion. A narrative summary was used to interpret the tabulated results.
RESULTS
Diagnostic performances were reported as specificities, sensitivities, and AUC. The AUC for S. haematobium recombinant antigens ranged from 0.65 to 0.98, and 0.69 to 0.96 for urine IgG ELISA. S. mansoni recombinant antigens had sensitivities ranging from 65.3% to 100% and specificities ranging from 57.4% to 100%. Except for 4 peptides which had poor diagnostic performances, most peptides had sensitivities ranging from 67.71% to 96.15% and specificities ranging from 69.23% to 100%. S. mansoni chimeric protein was reported to have a sensitivity of 86.8% and a specificity of 94.2%.
CONCLUSION
The tetraspanin CD63 antigen had the best diagnostic performance for S. haematobium. The tetraspanin CD63 antigen Serum IgG POC-ICTs had a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 100%. Peptide Smp_150390.1 (216-230) serum based IgG ELISA had the best diagnostic performance for S. mansoni with a sensitivity of 96.15% and a specificity of 100%. Peptides were reported to demonstrate good to excellent diagnostic performances. S. mansoni multi-peptide chimeric protein further improved the diagnostic accuracy of synthetic peptides. Together with the advantages associated with urine sampling technique, we recommend development of multi-peptide chimeric proteins urine based point of care tools.
Topics: Animals; Schistosoma haematobium; Schistosoma mansoni; Tetraspanin 30; Peptides; Blood Group Antigens; Recombinant Proteins; Recombinant Fusion Proteins; Immunoglobulin G
PubMed: 36862712
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282233 -
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Mar 2023Immunotherapy is a promising and progressing treatment approach for cancer. Bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) are antibody constructs that can bind to two different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Immunotherapy is a promising and progressing treatment approach for cancer. Bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) are antibody constructs that can bind to two different epitopes. The dual-specificity of BsAbs improves their efficacy compared to monoclonal antibodies.
AREAS COVERED
Although BsAbs have achieved excellent therapeutic effects in hematologic cancers, no systematic review with meta-analysis evaluated their efficacy in solid tumors. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to establish the clinical efficacy and safety of BsAbs in solid tumors.
EXPERT OPINION
BsAbs are not associated with significantly better safety or efficacy outcomes than conventional therapies. BsAb was not associated with improvement in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). However, BsAb increased the rate of stable disease (SD) significantly. Also, BsAb substantially increased the OS and PFS and resulted in a higher frequency of DCR for uveal melanoma. Furthermore, the safety analysis showed no obvious difference in the rate of any adverse events (AEs), grade ≥3 AEs, serious AEs, and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation in the intervention group compared to controls. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials on BsAbs in solid tumors are highly recommended.
Topics: Humans; Antibodies, Bispecific; Treatment Outcome; Melanoma; Immunotherapy; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 36856069
DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2023.2183847 -
Blood Advances Jun 2023Paroxysmal cold hemoglobinuria (PCH) is a rare autoimmune hemolytic anemia often overlooked as a potential etiology of hemolysis and is challenging to diagnose because...
Paroxysmal cold hemoglobinuria (PCH) is a rare autoimmune hemolytic anemia often overlooked as a potential etiology of hemolysis and is challenging to diagnose because of the complicated testing methods required. We performed a systematic review of all reported cases to better assess the clinical, immunohematologic, and therapeutic characteristics of PCH. We systematically analyzed PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE to identify all cases of PCH confirmed by Donath-Landsteiner (DL) testing. Three authors independently screened articles for inclusion, and systematically extracted epidemiologic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcomes data. Discrepancies were adjudicated by a fourth author. We identified 230 cases, with median presentation hemoglobin of 6.5 g/dL and nadir of 5.5 g/dL. The most common direct antiglobulin test (DAT) result was the presence of complement and absence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) bound to red blood cells, although other findings were observed in one-third of cases. DL antibody class and specificity were reported for 71 patients, of which 83.1% were IgG anti-P. The use of corticosteroids is common, although we found no significant difference in the length of hospitalization for patients with and without steroid therapy. Recent reports have highlighted the use of complement inhibitors. Among patients with follow-up, 99% (213 of 216) were alive at the time of reporting. To our knowledge, this represents the largest compilation of PCH cases to date. We discovered that contemporary PCH most commonly occurs in children with a preceding viral infection, corticosteroid use is frequent (but potentially ineffective), and DAT results are more disparate than traditionally reported.
Topics: Child; Humans; Hemoglobinuria, Paroxysmal; Erythrocytes; Anemia, Hemolytic, Autoimmune; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Immunoglobulin G
PubMed: 36716137
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009516 -
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy May 2023The accuracy of diagnostic laboratory tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can impact downstream clinical procedures in managing and...
The accuracy of diagnostic laboratory tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can impact downstream clinical procedures in managing and controlling the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To assess the effectiveness of laboratory tools for managing COVID-19 patients in low-income countries (LICs), we systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINHAL databases for reports published between January 2020 and June 2022. We found that 22 of 1303 articles reported the performance of various SARS-CoV-2 detection tools across 10 LICs. These tools were (1) real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR); (2) reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP); (3) rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs); (4) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); and (5) dot-blot immunoassay. The detection of COVID-19 is largely divided into two main streams-direct virus (antigen) detection and serology (immunoglobulin)-based detection. Point-of-care testing using antigen-based RDTs is preferred in LICs because of cost effectiveness and simplicity in the test procedures. The nucleic acid amplification technology (RT-PCR and RT-LAMP) has the highest diagnostic performance among the available tests, but it is not broadly used in this context due to costs and shortage of facilities/trained staff. The serology-based test method is affected by antibody interferences and varying amounts of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins expressed at different stages of disease onset. We further discuss the effectiveness and shortcomings of each of these tools in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19. Using the LICs as the study model, our findings highlight ways to improve the quality and turnaround time of COVID-19 testing in resource-constrained settings, notably through local/international collaborative efforts to refine the molecular-based or immunoassay-based testing technologies.
Topics: Humans; Clinical Laboratory Techniques; COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Molecular Diagnostic Techniques; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques; RNA, Viral; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 36705912
DOI: 10.1007/s40291-022-00637-8