<b><i>Background:</i></b> The sensitivity and specificity of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies have not been systematically analyzed. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-GBM antibodies for anti-GBM disease. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Potential studies were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform based on the index test and target condition. The inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective cohort studies or case-control studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of anti-GBM antibodies, and the reference standard was clinical diagnosis including biopsy results. The exclusion criteria were review articles, case reports, animal studies, and in vitro studies. Quality assessment was conducted based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. The overall quality was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Six studies (1,691 patients) and 11 index tests were included in our systematic review. A high risk of bias and concerns regarding the applicability of patient selection were noted because of the case-control design in 67% of the included studies. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI: 84–97%) and 97% (95% CI: 94–99%), respectively. The certainty of evidence was low because of the high risk of bias and indirectness. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> Anti-GBM antibodies may exhibit high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of anti-GBM disease. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm their precise diagnostic accuracy and compare diagnostic accuracies among different immunoassays.
Methadone continuation versus forced withdrawal on incarceration in a combined US prison and jail: a randomised, open-label trial.
BackgroundEarly menopause may be a risk of developing RA1. Although there are many reports about menopause and the onset of RA, it is not yet clear how the disease activity of RA differs for each generation including menopause.ObjectivesTo clarify how disease activity differs for each generation, especially in menopausal period.MethodsUsing the Japanese large RA cohort database (NinJa:National database of Rheumatic Diseases in Japan) of 2016, we divided 12257 RA females into three groups of age (under 44 years old=1, 45 to 55 years old=2, defined as a menopausal group, over 56 years old=3) and analysed them cross-sectionally. We conducted a one-way ANOVA on disease activity indexes such as Tender joint count (TJC), Swollen joint count (SJC), DAS28, HAQ-DI.ResultsTable 1 shows the number of people per group, the duration of disease, the titer of RF/ACPA, and the proportion of drugs used. The average usage of prednisone and the use of biologics was the most common in group 1. In table 2, TJC was the largest in group 2 (p<0.01). Furthermore, the difference between groups seen in TJC tends to be larger than TJC 28. There was no significant difference in SJC (SJC28) between three groups. Other disease activity indicators (ESR, CRP, DAS 28, HAQ-DI) were the largest in group 3 (p<0.01) and the percentage of Boolean remission was also lowest in group 3 (p=0.02).Abstract AB0255 – Table 1Characteristics of the three age groupsgroup123P-value Number of patients107116999487Symptom duration, years8.210.515.4p<0.01RF titer, (IU/mL)186233254p=0.06ACPA titer, (U/mL)90102132p<0.01On NSAIDs use, n(%)392 (36%)710 (41%)3668 (38%)p<0.01Daily mean prednisone dose, (mg/day)4.313.953.86p=0.01On DMARDs, n(%)984 (91%)1623 (95%)8835 (93%)p<0.01On a biologic, n(%)435 (40%)550 (32%)2570 (27%)Abstract AB0255 – Table 2Comparisons of values for disease outcomes of the three age groupsTender joint count(TJC), mean1.652.171.97p<0.01 Tender joint count(28 joints, TJC28), mean1.171.481.44p=0.01Swollen joint count(SJC), mean1.351.491.52p=0.23Swollen joint count(28 joints, SJC28), mean1.051.191.20p=0.12ESR, mean, (mm/h)17.318.829.7p<0.01CRP, mean, (mg/dl)0.320.370.58p<0.01DAS28, mean2.512.783.12p<0.01HAQDI score, mean0.250.420.77p<0.01Proportion in Boolean remission, n(%)351 (32%)485 (28%)2145 (22%)p=0.02ConclusionsThis study shows that TJC may increase during menopause, unlike other disease activity indicators. Especially in group 2, it is possible that the joints which can’t be evaluated at TJC 28 are affecting the results because in TJC, compared with TJC 28, there is a larger group difference. Although further studies are needed, an increase in TJC may reflect menopausal joint symptoms.Reference[1] Pikwer M, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012Mar;71(3):378–81.Disclosure of InterestNone declared
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.