周刚, 彭境罗, 刘幸生, 姜庆. f/t PSA与PSAD对tPSA灰区且直肠指检阴性前列腺癌诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 循证医学, 2015, 15(1): 48-52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-5144.2015.01.014
    引用本文: 周刚, 彭境罗, 刘幸生, 姜庆. f/t PSA与PSAD对tPSA灰区且直肠指检阴性前列腺癌诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 循证医学, 2015, 15(1): 48-52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-5144.2015.01.014
    ZHOU Gang, PENG Jing luo, LIU Xing sheng, JIANG Qing. Diagnostic Value of f/tPSA Versus PSAD for tPSA Gray Zone Prostate Cancer with Normal Digital Rectal Examination: A Meta-Analysis[J]. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2015, 15(1): 48-52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-5144.2015.01.014
    Citation: ZHOU Gang, PENG Jing luo, LIU Xing sheng, JIANG Qing. Diagnostic Value of f/tPSA Versus PSAD for tPSA Gray Zone Prostate Cancer with Normal Digital Rectal Examination: A Meta-Analysis[J]. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2015, 15(1): 48-52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-5144.2015.01.014

    f/t PSA与PSAD对tPSA灰区且直肠指检阴性前列腺癌诊断价值的Meta分析

    Diagnostic Value of f/tPSA Versus PSAD for tPSA Gray Zone Prostate Cancer with Normal Digital Rectal Examination: A Meta-Analysis

    • 摘要: 目的 系统评价在直肠指检阴性时,总前列腺特异性抗原处于诊断灰区(4~10 ng/mL),比较游离前列腺特异性抗原/总前列腺特异性抗原比值与前列腺特异抗原密度对前列腺癌的诊断效能。 方法 利用计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science、中国生物医学文献数据库等中外文数据库2014年3月以前公开发表的中、英文文献,收集所有关于比较游离前列腺特异性抗原/总前列腺特异性抗原比值与前列腺特异抗原密度诊断前列腺癌的文献,采用QUADAS-2进行质量评价,用MetaDisc1.4软件进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入7篇文献,样本量为900例,游离前列腺特异性抗原/总前列腺特异性抗原比值与前列腺特异抗原密度汇总敏感度分别为0.70(95%可信区间0.62~0.77)和0.70(95%可信区间0.62~0.77),汇总特异度分别为0.62(95%可信区间0.59~0.66)和0.68(95%可信区间 0.65~0.72),Q指数分别为0.674 4和0.729 1,综合受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.726 7和0.792 2,Z检验显示其差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论 在直肠指检阴性且总前列腺特异性抗原处于4~10 ng/mL时,游离前列腺特异性抗原/总前列腺特异性抗原比值与前列腺特异抗原密度对前列腺癌的诊断效能无明显差异。

       

      Abstract: Objective Performing a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic value of the ratio of free to total prostate-specific antigen (f/tPSA) with prostate specific antigen density (PSAD) for prostate cancer patients who had a negative normal digital rectal examination (DRE) and PSA level between 4 and 10 ng/mL. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were searched to identify related studies up to March 2014. Two independent reviewers performed the literature review and data extraction. Eligible studies presented data on diagnostic value of prostate cancer by f/tPSA and PSAD. The quality of included studies was assessed according to standard Quality Assessment of Diagnosis Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria. The pooled data were analyzed with Meta-DiSC1.4 software. Results Seven studies including 700 prostate cancer patients with a negative DRE and PSA level between 4~10 ng/mL were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and the Q index of f/tPSA in the diagnosis of prostate cancer were 0.70 (95%CI 0.62~0.77), 0.62 (95%CI 0.59~0.66) and 0.674 4, respectively, with comparison of those of PSAD being 0.70 (95%CI 0.62~0.77), 0.68 (95%CI 0.65~0.72) and 0.729 1, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of f/tPSA and PSAD were 0.726 7 and 0.792 2, respectively (P>0.05 by the Z-statistic), and no statistically significance was found. Conclusion The diagnostic value of f/tPSA and PSAD had no significant difference for prostate cancer patients with a normal DRE and PSA level between 4~10 ng/mL.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回