Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26716951›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015

Galactomannan detection for invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients.

Mariska M G Leeflang, Yvette J Debets-Ossenkopp, Junfeng Wang, Caroline E Visser, Rob J P M Scholten, Lotty Hooft, Henk A Bijlmer, Johannes B Reitsma, Mingming Zhang, Patrick M M Bossuyt and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

98 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Aspergillus Polymerase Chain Reaction: Systematic Review of Evidence for Clinical Use in Comparison With Antigen Testing.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2015
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Biomarkers in the Diagnosis of Aspergillosis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Introduction to XIV updating course of antimicrobials and infectious diseases.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2025
    Review
  18. Current diagnostic approach to fungal infection in the critically ill patient.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. A Pilot Metabolomic Study for DiagnosingInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Mariska M G LeeflangDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 22700, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1100 DE.
Yvette J Debets-Ossenkopp
Junfeng Wang
Caroline E Visser
Rob J P M Scholten
Lotty Hooft
Henk A Bijlmer
Johannes B Reitsma
Mingming Zhang
Patrick M M Bossuyt
Christina M Vandenbroucke-Grauls

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvasive aspergillosis is the most common life-threatening opportunistic invasive mycosis in immunocompromised patients. A test for invasive aspergillosis should neither be too invasive nor too great a burden for the already weakened patient. The serum galactomannan enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) seems to have the potential to meet both requirements.

objectivesTo obtain summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of galactomannan detection in serum for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis. SEARCH

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science with both MeSH terms and text words for both aspergillosis and the sandwich ELISA. We checked the reference lists of included studies and review articles for additional studies. We conducted the searches in February 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included cross-sectional studies, case-control designs and consecutive series of patients assessing the diagnostic accuracy of galactomannan detection for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in patients with neutropenia or patients whose neutrophils are functionally compromised. The reference standard was composed of the criteria given by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Mycoses Study Group (MSG). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We carried out meta-analysis using the bivariate method. We investigated sources of heterogeneity by adding potential sources of heterogeneity to the model as covariates. MAIN

resultsWe included 54 studies in the review (50 in the meta-analyses), containing 5660 patients, of whom 586 had proven or probable invasive aspergillosis. When using an optical density index (ODI) of 0.5 as a cut-off value, the sensitivity of the test was 82% (73% to 90%) and the specificity was 81% (72% to 90%). At a cut-off value of 1.0 ODI, the sensitivity was 72% (65% to 80%) and the specificity was 88% (84% to 92%). At a cut-off value of 1.5 ODI, the sensitivity was 61% (47% to 75%) and the specificity was 93% (89% to 97%). None of the potential sources of heterogeneity had a statistically significant effect on either sensitivity or specificity. AUTHORS'

conclusionsIf we used the test at a cut-off value of 0.5 ODI in a population of 100 patients with a disease prevalence of 9% (overall median prevalence), two patients who have invasive aspergillosis would be missed (sensitivity 82%, 18% false negatives), and 17 patients would be treated unnecessarily or referred unnecessarily for further testing (specificity 81%, 19% false negatives). If we used the test at a cut-off value of 1.5 in the same population, that would mean that four invasive aspergillosis patients would be missed (sensitivity 61%, 39% false negatives), and six patients would be treated or referred for further testing unnecessarily (specificity 93%, 7% false negatives). These numbers should, however, be interpreted with caution because the results were very heterogeneous.

Indexed as

Immunocompromised HostAspergillosisBiomarkersGalactoseHumansMannansOpportunistic InfectionsSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersgalactomannanGalactoseMannans

Identifiers

PMID26716951
PMCPMC6483812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.