Limits...
Circulating VEGF as a biomarker for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a systematic review and a meta-analysis.

Liang B, He Q, Zhong L, Wang S, Pan Z, Wang T, Zhao Y - Onco Targets Ther (2015)

Bottom Line: However, its diagnostic value has not been widely accepted because the conclusions are inconsistent and even conflicting.A similar finding was found in subgroups with the smaller sample size (<100 subjects).In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggests that VEGF has moderate diagnostic accuracy for OC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Biochip Center and State Key Lab of Cell Biology, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT
VEGF is a frequently studied angiogenic factor in ovarian cancer (OC), and is considered to have an important role in the progression of OC. However, its diagnostic value has not been widely accepted because the conclusions are inconsistent and even conflicting. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of VEGF in OC. A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WANFANG databases for relevant published articles (the last search update was November 18, 2014). The diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and the summary receiver operating characteristic curves were pooled by Meta DiSc 1.4 software. A total of ten studies with 1,131 subjects were finally included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.67 (0.63-0.73), 0.78 (0.75-0.81), 3.08 (6.36-12.22), 0.39 (0.29-0.51), 9.10 (5.43-45.25), and 0.8175, respectively. Furthermore, to explore the sources of heterogeneity, we conducted subgroup analyses based on ethnicity and sample size. The diagnostic accuracy of VEGF was higher in an Asian population than in a Caucasian population. A similar finding was found in subgroups with the smaller sample size (<100 subjects). In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggests that VEGF has moderate diagnostic accuracy for OC. Considering our limitations and the heterogeneity among our selected studies, larger, well-designed prospective and multicenter validation studies are needed to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum VEGF for OC.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Forest plots (random effects model) of pooled sensitivity and specificity of each included study for diagnosis of ovarian cancer.Notes: (A) Sensitivity; (B) specificity.Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4440429&req=5

f2-ott-8-1075: Forest plots (random effects model) of pooled sensitivity and specificity of each included study for diagnosis of ovarian cancer.Notes: (A) Sensitivity; (B) specificity.Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

Mentions: The pooled SEN of VEGF for OC diagnosis was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63–0.71) (Figure 2A) and the pooled SPE was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75–0.81) (Figure 2B). The PLR was 3.08 (95% CI: 2.27–4.19) (Figure 3A), the NLR was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.29–0.51) (Figure 3B), and the DOR was 9.10 (95% CI: 5.43–15.25) (Figure 3C). The SROC curve shows an overall summary of tests, which illustrates the relationship between SEN and SPE. The bivariate SROC curves showed area under the curve (AUC) of circulating VEGF was 0.8175, suggesting that efficiency of VEGF for OC diagnosis was considerable (Figure 4).


Circulating VEGF as a biomarker for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a systematic review and a meta-analysis.

Liang B, He Q, Zhong L, Wang S, Pan Z, Wang T, Zhao Y - Onco Targets Ther (2015)

Forest plots (random effects model) of pooled sensitivity and specificity of each included study for diagnosis of ovarian cancer.Notes: (A) Sensitivity; (B) specificity.Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4440429&req=5

f2-ott-8-1075: Forest plots (random effects model) of pooled sensitivity and specificity of each included study for diagnosis of ovarian cancer.Notes: (A) Sensitivity; (B) specificity.Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
Mentions: The pooled SEN of VEGF for OC diagnosis was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63–0.71) (Figure 2A) and the pooled SPE was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75–0.81) (Figure 2B). The PLR was 3.08 (95% CI: 2.27–4.19) (Figure 3A), the NLR was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.29–0.51) (Figure 3B), and the DOR was 9.10 (95% CI: 5.43–15.25) (Figure 3C). The SROC curve shows an overall summary of tests, which illustrates the relationship between SEN and SPE. The bivariate SROC curves showed area under the curve (AUC) of circulating VEGF was 0.8175, suggesting that efficiency of VEGF for OC diagnosis was considerable (Figure 4).

Bottom Line: However, its diagnostic value has not been widely accepted because the conclusions are inconsistent and even conflicting.A similar finding was found in subgroups with the smaller sample size (<100 subjects).In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggests that VEGF has moderate diagnostic accuracy for OC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Biochip Center and State Key Lab of Cell Biology, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT
VEGF is a frequently studied angiogenic factor in ovarian cancer (OC), and is considered to have an important role in the progression of OC. However, its diagnostic value has not been widely accepted because the conclusions are inconsistent and even conflicting. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic value of VEGF in OC. A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WANFANG databases for relevant published articles (the last search update was November 18, 2014). The diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and the summary receiver operating characteristic curves were pooled by Meta DiSc 1.4 software. A total of ten studies with 1,131 subjects were finally included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.67 (0.63-0.73), 0.78 (0.75-0.81), 3.08 (6.36-12.22), 0.39 (0.29-0.51), 9.10 (5.43-45.25), and 0.8175, respectively. Furthermore, to explore the sources of heterogeneity, we conducted subgroup analyses based on ethnicity and sample size. The diagnostic accuracy of VEGF was higher in an Asian population than in a Caucasian population. A similar finding was found in subgroups with the smaller sample size (<100 subjects). In conclusion, the present meta-analysis suggests that VEGF has moderate diagnostic accuracy for OC. Considering our limitations and the heterogeneity among our selected studies, larger, well-designed prospective and multicenter validation studies are needed to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum VEGF for OC.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus