SynthesisJournal of gastroenterology2026
Diagnostic accuracy of anti-integrin αvβ6 in ulcerative colitis: a diagnostic meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- UC-associated autoantibodies to αvβ6 inhibit mucosal TGFβ activation and predispose to intestinal inflammation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUlcerative colitis (UC) presents with diagnostic challenges due to symptom overlap with other gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. Recent studies identify anti-integrin αvβ6 autoantibodies as a promising biomarker for UC. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-integrin αvβ6 antibodies in distinguishing UC from healthy individuals and other GI diseases.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase up to February, 2025, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing the diagnostic performance of anti-integrin αvβ6 antibodies in UC patients were included. A bivariate random-effects model was used to pool sensitivity and specificity estimates using STATA. Forest plots and SROC curves were generated. Meta-regression and interaction analyses explored the influence of covariates such as control group type, age group, and geographic region on diagnostic performance. Risk of bias was assessed using tool QUADAS-2. Post hoc analyses were conducted to assess the impact of cut-off thresholds and ELISA platforms on the diagnostic performance of anti-integrin αvβ6 antibodies.
resultsSix studies comprising 3887 participants (1904 UC patients) were included in meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of anti-integrin αvβ6 for UC across all comparator groups were 83% (95% CI: 0.70-0.91) and 93% (95% CI: 0.88-0.97), respectively. Diagnostic performance remained consistent across control types for sensitivity but varied significantly for specificity, especially when Crohn's disease was used as a comparator (81%; 95% CI: 0.75-0.86). Multivariate meta-regression identified patient age, geographic region, and control group type as significant modifiers of specificity. Interaction models further confirmed a combined influence of these factors on diagnostic performance. Post hoc analyses revealed that sensitivity remained stable across thresholds (2SD: 0.65, 3SD: 0.87), while specificity varied significantly depending on cut-off values (2SD: 0.89, 3SD: 0.92) and ELISA methodology (0.92 vs. 0.83).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrates that anti-integrin αvβ6 antibodies exhibit high diagnostic accuracy for UC, with consistent sensitivity and specificity. Their performance is influenced by patient demographics and study region, suggesting the need for tailored diagnostic criteria in clinical settings.
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.