Key result
Periostin demonstrates moderate accuracy for diagnosing asthma with ~87% specificity.
Why the study?
The accuracy of periostin for the diagnosis of asthma required evaluation.
Does periostin measurement accurately diagnose asthma?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,448)
Does periostin measurement accurately diagnose asthma?
Odds Ratio: 13.78 (95% CI 4.64–40.93)
Periostin demonstrates moderate diagnostic accuracy for predicting asthma, with high specificity but lower sensitivity.
Periostin offers moderate diagnostic accuracy for asthma with high specificity; leaves open routine clinical use pending prospective validation.
Objective We sought to evaluate the accuracy of periostin for the diagnosis of asthma through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods we searched the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of science) to find relevant studies through December 31, 2018. Studies selecting, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two researchers independently according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. We used bivariate mixed effects model to conduct the meta-analysis.Results A total of 9 studies including 1448 subjects with asthma were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.68 (95% CI, 0.42–0.86), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76–0.93) and 13.78 (95% CI, 4.64–40.93) respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating curves (SROC) was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84–0.90). The Spearman correlation coefficient indicated that no threshold effect existed in the included studies. The study design had statistical significance for sensitivity results (p < 0.001) through regression analysis. Heterogeneity might be caused by non-threshold effect.Conclusion Periostin has moderate accuracy in the diagnosis of asthma.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jia et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis in asthma (n=1,448). Periostin was evaluated on diagnosis of asthma (DOR 13.78, 95% CI 4.64-40.93). Periostin demonstrated moderate accuracy for diagnosing asthma, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.68, specificity of 0.87, and a diagnostic odds ratio of 13.78 (95% CI 4.64-40.93).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: