ReviewCureus2026
Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Serum Glutamate Dehydrogenase (GLDH) for Drug-Induced Liver Injury: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains an important clinical and regulatory challenge because commonly used liver injury biomarkers may lack sufficient tissue specificity. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), the standard biochemical marker, may be elevated in both hepatic and non-hepatic injury, limiting its ability to distinguish hepatocellular damage from skeletal muscle injury. Serum glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH), a hepatocyte-enriched mitochondrial enzyme, has been proposed as a more tissue-specific biomarker of hepatocellular injury. The objective of this study was to systematically determine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio of serum GLDH for DILI; to construct a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve; and to assess the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) for diagnostic test accuracy. Systematic searches of major electronic databases were conducted from inception to December 2024. Studies reporting the sensitivity and specificity of serum GLDH for DILI in adults using a valid reference standard were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis using the Reitsma model was performed in R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE for diagnostic test accuracy. Six studies, including 1,617 participants, comprising 595 DILI cases and 1,022 controls, were included. Pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.80-0.92), and pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI 0.81-0.90). Pooled LR+ was 6.30 (95% CI 4.30-9.23), and pooled LR- was 0.15 (95% CI 0.10-0.24). The SROC curve demonstrated excellent overall discrimination. Sensitivity analysis excluding two case-control studies with high spectrum bias yielded consistent estimates. The certainty of evidence was low for sensitivity and very low for specificity, mainly because of spectrum bias in two studies and indirectness related to the control population in one study. Serum GLDH demonstrates good diagnostic accuracy for identifying DILI across the included studies, with a pooled sensitivity of 87% and specificity of 86%. These findings support GLDH as a complementary biomarker to ALT, particularly in clinical contexts where hepatocyte-specific injury needs to be distinguished from non-hepatic causes of aminotransferase elevation. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to evaluate GLDH alongside ALT in real-time diagnostic and clinical decision-making 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.