Clinical diagnostic significance of 14-3-3η protein, high-mobility group box-1, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, anti-mutated citrullinated vimentin antibodies and rheumatoid factor in rheumatoid arthritis

Diagnostic value of anti‐citrullinated α‐enolase peptide 1 antibody in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…However, some of our included studies had missing data, which prevented analysis of this issue.To date, RA remains a clinical diagnosis and autoantibody tests only serve as an aid to clinical assessment because of the existence of patients with seronegative RA who are negative for both anti-CCP antibody and RF,45 although anti-CCP antibody and RF are routinely detected as indicators for diagnosing RA. However, our meta-analysis indicated that due to the lower sensitivity of diagnosing RA and similar specificity relative to that of the anti-CCP antibody,46 this demonstrated that anti-CEP 1 antibody detection is not superior to anti-CCP antibody detection for diagnosing RA.…”

Diagnostic accuracy of 14‐3‐3 η protein in rheumatoid arthritis: A meta‐analysis

“…Next, we carried out the subgroup analysis by Meta‐Disc 1.4 based on gender ratio, mean age, ethnicity, case number of RA patients, control groups, and study design. As shown in Table , after grouping, both the inconsistency (1‐square) of pooled sensitivity and specificity decreased in African and European groups, in Asian populations, 15,17,24‐26,28,29 the pooled sensitivity had no apparent change (0.73 [0.71‐0.75]) and the pooled specificity increased (0.91 [0.89‐0.93]); in African populations, 18,27,30 both the pooled sensitivity (0.88 [0.82‐0.93]) and specificity (0.91 [0.85‐0.95]) augmented; however, in European groups, 16,31,32 the pooled sensitivity (0.67 [0.63‐0.71]) and specificity (0.83 [0.80‐0.86]) declined. As shown in Table , in healthy and disease control, 16‐18,25,26,28‐32 the diagnostic value of pooled sensitivity decreased to 0.67 (0.65‐0.70) and pooled specificity had no apparent change (0.88 [0.86‐0.90]); however, in healthy controls, 15,24,27 both the pooled sensitivity (0.96 [0.93‐0.98]) and specificity (0.90 [0.84‐0.95]) increased, and both the inconsistency (1‐square) of pooled sensitivity and specificity decreased.…”

“…Next, we carried out the subgroup analysis by Meta-Disc 1.4 based on gender ratio, mean age, ethnicity, case number of RA patients, control groups, and study design. As shown in Table S1, after grouping, both the inconsistency (1-square) of pooled sensitivity and specificity decreased in African and European groups, in Asian populations, 15,17,[24][25][26]28,29 the pooled sensitivity had no apparent change Table S1, in healthy and disease control, [16][17][18]25,26,[28][29][30][31][32] the diagnostic value of pooled sensitivity decreased to 0.67 (0.65-0.70) and pooled specificity had no apparent change (0.88 [0.86-0.90]); however, in healthy controls, 15,24,27 both the pooled sensitivity (0.96 [0.93-0.98]) and specificity (0.90 [0.84-0.95]) increased, and both the inconsistency (1-square) of pooled sensitivity and specificity decreased. Overall, these results suggested that ethnicity and control groups may be a major source of heterogeneity.…”

“…A total of 381 records were identified through databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) and by scrutinizing the reference lists F I G U R E 1 Flow diagram of screening studies of the included studies, [15][16][17][18][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] of which 164 were excluded on account of duplicate records. Following thorough screening of the titles and abstracts, we excluded 136 of the remaining 217 studies due to no relevance to the topic or they were animal experiments.…”

British Journal of Biomedical Science in 2020. What have we learned?

“…Early diagnosis of the disease is complicated by the diverse nature of the disorder and a lack of a good early serological marker, but is clearly important. Huang and colleagues [68] investigated a series of markers known to be raised in RA, namely high-mobility group box-1 (a DNA chaperone that acts as a proinflammatory cytokine), anticitrullinated peptide antibodies (anti-CCP) which are the most specific for RA and predict joint damage, rheumatoid factor (RF, widely used in clinical practice), antimutated citrullinated vimentin antibodies (anti-MCV) and a new marker serum 14-3-3η which is highly specific and related to the severity of the disease. Despite this battery of markers there has been little comparison of their diagnostic use.…”