Cadieux Geneviève, Campbell Jennifer, Dendukuri Nandini
Dalla Lana School of Public Health (Cadieux, Campbell), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.; Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health (Dendukuri), McGill University, Montréal, Que.
CMAJ Open. 2016 Dec 2;4(4):E737-E745. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20160084. eCollection 2016 Oct-Dec.
Several expert groups, including the United States Preventive Services Task Force and the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, have recently examined or are currently examining whether primary care physicians should screen asymptomatic adults for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. To inform decision-making on HCV screening, we performed a systematic review of the accuracy of antibody tests compared with other immunoassays and RNA detection for screening asymptomatic adults for HCV infection in Canada.
MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from 1990 to 2016; resulting citations were uploaded into DistillerSR and independently screened by 2 reviewers. Original research studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were eligible for inclusion. At least 80% of the study population had to be asymptomatic, nonpregnant, treatment-naïve adults with unknown liver enzyme values and unknown HCV status. Risk of bias was assessed with the use of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 (QUADAS-2) tool; the quality of the body of evidence was assessed by means of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.
Of 1537 articles identified, 81 underwent full-text review, and 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with RNA detection, the sensitivity of the third-generation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was variable (61.0%-81.8%), and its specificity was high (97.5%-99.7%). As expected, there were more false-positive results when comparing antibody tests to RNA detection than to other immunoassays. Our GRADE assessment suggested that there was a high concern for risk of bias, particularly verification bias, and substantial inconsistency between studies in terms of their design.
More research is needed to better characterize the accuracy of antibody tests used to screen for HCV infection in the general population. Jurisdictions that recently adopted birth cohort screening for HCV infection are encouraged to evaluate and report on the accuracy of HCV screening tests and screening benefits and harms. no. CRD42016039710.
包括美国预防服务工作组和加拿大预防性医疗保健工作组在内的多个专家小组,最近已对或正在对初级保健医生是否应对无症状成年人进行丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)感染筛查展开研究。为了为HCV筛查的决策提供依据,我们对加拿大用于筛查无症状成年人HCV感染的抗体检测与其他免疫测定及RNA检测的准确性进行了系统评价。
检索1990年至2016年的MEDLINE和Embase数据库;将检索到的文献导入DistillerSR并由2名评审员独立筛选。纳入的文献须为原始研究、系统评价和荟萃分析。研究人群中至少80%须为无症状、未怀孕、未接受过治疗且肝酶值和HCV状态未知的成年人。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估第2版(QUADAS - 2)工具评估偏倚风险;采用GRADE(推荐分级评估、制定与评价)方法评估证据体的质量。
在检索到的1537篇文章中,81篇进行了全文评审,9项研究符合纳入标准。与RNA检测相比,第三代酶联免疫吸附测定的敏感性各异(61.0% - 81.8%),但其特异性较高(97.5% - 99.7%)。正如预期的那样,与RNA检测相比,抗体检测产生的假阳性结果多于与其他免疫测定相比时的情况。我们的GRADE评估表明,对偏倚风险,尤其是验证偏倚高度关注,且各研究在设计方面存在实质性不一致。
需要开展更多研究以更好地描述用于普通人群HCV感染筛查的抗体检测的准确性。鼓励最近采用出生队列进行HCV感染筛查的辖区评估并报告HCV筛查检测的准确性以及筛查的益处和危害。注册号:CRD42016039710。