J Cancer 2017; 8(17):3615-3622. doi:10.7150/jca.18901
Diagnostic Accuracy of a CA125-Based Biomarker Panel in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
1. Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China;
2. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China;
3. Pancreatic Cancer Institute, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China.
* These authors contributed equally to this work.
Meng Q, Shi S, Liang C, Xiang J, Liang D, Zhang B, Qin Y, Ji S, Xu W, Xu J, Ni Q, Yu X. Diagnostic Accuracy of a CA125-Based Biomarker Panel in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cancer 2017; 8(17):3615-3622. doi:10.7150/jca.18901. Available from http://www.jcancer.org/v08p3615.htm
Background: Increasing evidence from recent studies has revealed the association of CA125 with the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, but inconsistent findings have been reported. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of a serum CA125-based diagnostic panel in predicting malignant pancreatic cancer.
Materials and Methods: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science for relevant articles from inception to October 2016. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. The performance characteristics were pooled using random-effects models. The statistical analysis was performed using Meta-Disc 1.4 and Stata Version 12.0 software.
Results: A total of 1235 participants pooled from 8 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of tumor predictors for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The pooling accuracy analysis of CA125 alone indicated that the pooled sensitivity was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.54-0.62) and the specificity was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75-0.82), whereas the serum CA125-based diagnostic panel had a pooled sensitivity of 0.47 (95% CI 0.47-0.51) and a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.86-0.90). Furthermore, the AUC and Q-value of the CA125-based diagnostic panel were 0.89 and 0.82, respectively, which indicated that the CA125-based panel is superior to CA125 or CA19-9 alone in diagnosing pancreatic cancer. No obvious publication bias was found.
Conclusions: In summary, a CA125-based diagnostic panel is better at diagnosing pancreatic cancer than a test using CA125 or CA19-9 alone. Further studies should be performed to confirm our conclusion.
Keywords: CA125, pancreatic cancer, diagnosis, meta-analysis.