细胞游离DNA在胆道癌诊断中的价值：一项meta分析

杨越, 何开举, 宗家豪, 杨自逸, 吴向嵩, 龚伟

Diagnostic value of cell-free DNA to biliary tract cancers: a meta-analysis

YANG Yue, HE Kaiju, ZONG Jiahao, YANG Ziyi, WU Xiangsong, GONG Wei

表3 亚组分析

Tab 3 Subgroup analysis

Subgroup Study/n Sensitivity (95%CI) Specificity (95%CI) PLR NLR DOR AUC (95%CI) Overall 28 0.80 (0.67‒0.88) 0.96 (0.92‒0.98) 22.7 0.21 108 0.96 (0.94‒0.98) Study type Prospective study 16 0.74 (0.51‒0.89) 0.97 (0.93‒0.99) 26.1 0.26 99 0.97 (0.95‒0.98) Retrospective study 10 0.86 (0.72‒0.93) 0.93 (0.73‒0.99) 12.4 0.15 81 0.95 (0.92‒0.96) Sample size >90 12 0.89 (0.78‒0.95) 0.96 (0.83‒0.99) 20.9 0.12 179 0.96 (0.94‒0.98) ≤90 16 0.67 (0.47‒0.83) 0.97 (0.92‒0.99) 23.9 0.34 71 0.96 (0.94‒0.97) Method Gene or mutation analysis 6 0.67 (0.44‒0.84) 1.00 (0.85‒1.00) 457.0 0.33 1 394 0.95 (0.93‒0.97) qPCR 13 0.94 (0.84‒0.98) 0.98 (0.88‒1.00) 38.8 0.06 644 0.99 (0.98‒1.00) Methylation analysis 9 0.51 (0.37‒0.65) 0.94 (0.82‒0.98) 9.2 0.52 18 0.77 (0.73‒0.81) Sample type Bile 4 0.70 (0.53‒0.83) 1.00 (0.67‒1.00) 511.0 0.30 1 690 0.95 (0.92‒0.96) Serum 19 0.85 (0.66‒0.94) 0.97 (0.90‒0.99) 24.7 0.16 156 0.97 (0.96‒0.99) Plasma 5 0.72 (0.45‒0.89) 0.92 (0.70‒0.98) 9.4 0.30 31 0.91 (0.88‒0.93) Control type Benign biliary disease 18 0.68 (0.54‒0.79) 0.96 (0.92‒0.99) 19.0 0.34 57 0.93 (0.91‒0.95) Healthy population 6 1.00 (0.70‒1.00) 1.00 (0.90‒1.00) 503.6 0.00 205 953 1.00 (0.99‒1.00) Reference standard Pathological examination 4 0.82 (0.69‒0.90) 0.93 (0.60‒0.99) 12.3 0.19 63 0.90 (0.87‒0.93) Pathological examination in BTC group 16 0.75 (0.52‒0.89) 0.98 (0.94‒0.99) 33.7 0.26 130 0.98 (0.96‒0.99) Clinical assessment 8 0.87 (0.66‒0.96) 0.95 (0.68‒0.99) 18.2 0.14 129 0.96 (0.94‒0.97)