Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27227950›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2016

Diagnostic Value of Serum IgG4 for IgG4-Related Disease: A PRISMA-compliant Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Mingju Hao, Min Liu, Gaowei Fan, Xin Yang, Jinming Li

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Thoracic manifestations of IgG4-related disease.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mingju HaoFrom the National Center for Clinical Laboratories (MH, GF, XY, JL), Beijing Hospital; Graduate School (MH, GF, XY, JL), Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing; Department of Clinical Laboratory (MH), Qianfo Mountain Hospital of Shandong University; and Department of Clinical Laboratory (ML), Jinan Dermatosis Prevention and Control Hospital, Jinan, People's Republic of China.
Min Liu
Gaowei Fan
Xin Yang
Jinming Li

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many studies about serum IgG4 for the diagnosis of IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) have been reported. However, these studies had relatively small sample sizes and the diagnostic accuracy values varied much between them.The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum IgG4 for IgG4-RD.We conducted a search of relevant articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library databases published before December 2015.Studies those assessed the diagnostic accuracy of serum IgG4 for IgG4-RD and those provided the cut-off value for serum IgG4 were included.Data were synthesized using the random-effect model. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA with the MIDAS module and Meta-DiSc 1.4 software.A total of 9 case-control studies were analyzed, which included 1235 patients with IgG4-RD and 5696 overall controls. The pooled estimate, for a cut-off value ranged from 135 to 144 mg/dL, produced a sensitivity of 87.2% (95% CI, 85.2-89.0%) and a specificity of 82.6% (95% CI, 81.6-83.6%). The positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 6.48 (95% CI, 3.98-10.57), 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09-0.21), and 45.15 (95% CI, 23.41-87.06), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was 0.94 (0.92-0.96). When a cut-off value of 2-fold the upper limit of normal was used (ranged from 270 to 280 mg/dL), the pooled sensitivity was 63% (95% CI, 60.0-66.0%), and the specificity was 94.8% (95% CI, 94.1-95.4%). The PLR, NLR, and DOR were 13.3 (95% CI, 7.39-24.0), 0.41 (95% CI, 0.29-0.58) and 33.42 (95% CI, 13.88-80.43), respectively. The AUC of the SROC was 0.92 (0.90-0.94).Only a relatively small number of studies were included, and significant heterogeneity was observed in this meta-analysis.Serum IgG4 is a modestly effective marker to diagnose IgG4-RD. Doubling the cut-off value for IgG4 could not improve the overall test characteristics. A high specificity inevitably accompanies with a significant sacrifice in sensitivity.

Indexed as

Autoimmune DiseasesBiomarkersHumansImmunoglobulin GOdds RatioROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID27227950
PMCPMC4902374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.