Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018;51(6):2631-2646.
doi: 10.1159/000495935. Epub 2018 Dec 11.

Diagnostic Value of Autoantibodies in Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Free article
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic Value of Autoantibodies in Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Jiangyue Qin et al. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2018.
Free article

Abstract

Background/aims: Recently, many studies have demonstrated that various tumor-associated autoantibodies have been detected in early stages of lung cancer. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate available evidence on the diagnostic value of autoantibodies against tumor-associated antigens in lung cancer.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and other databases through 23 March 2018. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. We used the bivariate mixed-effect models to calculate pooled values of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratios, negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were used to summarize overall test performance. Deek's funnel plot was used to detect publication bias.

Results: Review of 468 candidate articles identified fifty-three articles with a total of 11,515 patients for qualitative review and meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity and area under the SROC curve were as follows for tumor-associated autoantibodies against the following proteins: p53, 0.19, 0.98, 0.82; NY-ESO-1, 0.17, 0.98, 0.90; Survivin, 0.19, 0.99, 0.96; c-myc, 0.14, 0.98, 0.45; Cyclin B1, 0.18, 0.98, 0.91; GBU4-5, 0.07, 0.98, 0.91; CAGE, 0.14, 0.98, 0.90; p16, 0.08, 0.97, 0.91; SOX2, 0.14, 0.99, 0.93; and HuD, 0.17, 0.99, 0.82.

Conclusion: Each tumor-associated autoantibody on its own showed excellent diagnostic specificity for lung cancer but inadequate sensitivity. Our results suggest that combinations or panels of tumor-associated autoantibodies may provide better sensitivity for diagnosing lung cancer, and the diagnostic accuracy of tumor-associated autoantibodies should be validated in more studies.

Keywords: Diagnosis; Lung cancer; Meta-analysis; Tumor-associated autoantibodies.

PubMed Disclaimer