The dried blood spot (DBS) is increasingly used for the hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis of the methodology for HCV screening in DBS samples, particularly in the type of diagnostic assay used. We performed a meta-analysis of all eligible studies published to date (March 2018). The literature search revealed 26 studies: 21 for detection of anti-HCV antibodies and 10 for detection of HCV-RNA. Statistical analyses were performed using Meta-DiSc and STATA (MIDAS module). For detection of HCV antibodies, pooled diagnostic accuracy measures were as follows: sensitivity 96.1%, specificity 99.2%, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) 105, negative likelihood ratio (NLR) 0.04, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 2692.9, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) 0.997 ± 0.001. For detection of HCV-RNA, the pooled diagnostic accuracy measures were as follows: sensitivity 97.8%, specificity 99.2%, PLR 44.8, NLR 0.04, DOR 1966.9, and SROC 0.996 ± 0.013. Similar values of pooled diagnostic accuracy measures were found according to the type of anti-HCV antibody detection assay (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, rapid diagnostic test, and chemiluminescence assays) and HCV-RNA detection assay (real-time polymerase chain reaction and transcription-mediated amplification). The analysis of external validity showed a high negative predicted value (NPV) for both approaches, but a low positive predicted value (PPV) when prevalence was < 10%, particularly in HCV-RNA tests. Finally, this meta-analysis is subject to limitations, especially publication bias and significant heterogeneity between studies. In conclusion, HCV screening in DBS samples has an outstanding diagnostic performance, with no relevant differences between the techniques used. However, external validity may be limited when the HCV prevalence is low.
Background: Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is monitored by assessing plasma HCV-RNA load. However, detection of HCV core antigen (HCVcAg) may be an alternative. Aim:To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the HCVcAg assay to monitor the efficacy of DAAs in HCV-infected patients Methods: We performed searches in multiple electronic databases until 6 July 2022, of studies evaluating the HCVcAg detection in plasma or serum compared with the HCV-RNA test (gold standard). We calculated pooled measurement at 2 and 4 weeks of treatment, and at end-of-treatment (EOT), as well as sustained virological response (SVR; 12 weeks after EOT). Results:We selected 16 studies from 2016 to 2022, with 3237 patients and 8958 samples. Overall, the diagnostic performance and clinical utility of the HCVcAg assay were poor at week 2 (sensitivity = 0.40, specificity = 0.96, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) = 9.16, negative likelihood ratio (NLR) = 0.63, and area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) = 0.57), fair at week 4 (sensitivity = 0.30, speci-
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.