SynthesisPloS one2014
Diagnostic accuracy of Ber-EP4 for metastatic adenocarcinoma in serous effusions: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of the Monoclonal Antibody B72.3 in Diagnosis of Malignant Carcinomatous Serous Effusions-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance.Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology · 2025Pooled it
- Peritoneal Lavage Cytology and Radiologically Evident Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Within 12 Months in Advanced Digestive Cancer Without Macroscopic Peritoneal Disease: A Single-Centre Prognostic Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Pregnancy Deciduosis Mimicking Abdominal Tuberculosis and Peritoneal Carcinomatosis: A Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Searching for the source: Extraovarian primary peritoneal carcinoma presenting as chest wall masses.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Utility of BerEp4/calretinin and desmin/epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) dual immunocytochemical staining in effusion cytology.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio predicts lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Value of Claudin-4 and EZH2 Immunohistochemistry in Effusion Cytology.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Cell-blocks and immunohistochemistry.CytoJournal · 2021Review
- Anti-EpCAM antibodies for detection of metastatic carcinoma in effusions and peritoneal wash.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Serous cystadenocarcinoma of the spleen.Radiology case reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have investigated the utility of Ber-EP4 in differentiating metastatic adenocarcinoma (MAC) from malignant epithelial mesothelioma (MM) and/or reactive mesothelial cells (RM) in serous effusions. However, the results remain controversial. The aim of this study is to determine the overall accuracy of Ber-EP4 in serous effusions for MAC through a meta-analysis of published studies. Publications addressing the accuracy of Ber-EP4 in the diagnosis of MAC were selected from the Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library. Data from selected studies were pooled to yield summary sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. Statistical analysis was performed by Meta-Disc 1.4 and STATA 12.0 softwares. 29 studies, based on 2646 patients, met the inclusion criteria and the summary estimating for Ber-EP4 in the diagnosis of MAC were: sensitivity 0.8 (95% CI: 0.78-0.82), specificity 0.94 (95% CI: 0.93-0.96), positive likelihood ratio (PLR) 12.72 (95% CI: 8.66-18.7), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) 0.18 (95% CI: 0.12-0.26) and diagnostic odds ratio 95.05 (95% CI: 57.26-157.77). The SROC curve indicated that the maximum joint sensitivity and specificity (Q-value) was 0.91; the area under the curve was 0.96. Our findings suggest that BER-EP4 may be a useful diagnostic adjunctive tool for confirming MAC in serous effusions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.