SynthesisInfectious diseases of poverty2024
Diagnostic performance of hepatitis C virus core antigen testing for detecting hepatitis C in people living with hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Monoclonal antibody development against the Hepatitis C virus core protein enables rapid antigen detection.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of universal screening for HCV infection in China: a Markov modelling study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current diagnostic strategy for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection involves a two-step approach: antibody HCV screening followed by confirmatory nucleic acid testing. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Abbott ARCHITECT HCV Ag assay in serum/plasma samples as a potential one-step alternative for diagnosing active HCV infection in people living with hepatitis B virus (PLWHB) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA-DTA guidelines. This protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023402093). A comprehensive search of electronic databases identified studies published up to 1 November 2024, comparing the ARCHITECT HCV Ag assay to an HCV-RNA reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were pooled using a random-effects model within the MIDAS module of Stata software. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Q statistic, quantified using the I², and further explored through meta-regression.
resultsTen studies (n = 494 participants) met inclusion criteria. The Abbott ARCHITECT HCV Ag assay demonstrated high sensitivity [91%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 76-97%] and specificity (99%, 95% CI: 99-100%). The positive likelihood ratio (PLR) was 81.20 (95% CI: 12.34-534.36), and the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) was 0.09 (95% CI: 0.03-0.27). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-SROC) was 99% (95% CI 98-100%). In regions with high HCV prevalence (≥ 10%), the test accurately confirmed active HCV infection in over 90% of cases. However, confirmatory testing remains necessary in low-prevalence settings (≤ 5%). The assay demonstrated an excellent ability to identify individuals without HCV infection, with a low false-negative rate (≤ 2%) regardless of HCV prevalence. Heterogeneity analysis revealed moderate to substantial variation in test performance (I² = 72.09% for sensitivity, 35.47% for PLR, and 78.33% for NLR). QUADAS-2 applicability concerns predicted heterogeneity, but differences were likely insignificant due to minimal variations and limited studies.
conclusionsThe Abbott ARCHITECT HCV Ag assay exhibited promising accuracy in detecting active HCV infection among PLWHB. This test might help diagnose active HCV infection in high-prevalence scenarios (≥ 10%) but needs further confirmation in low-prevalence settings (≤ 5%).
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.