Test accuracy of drug and antibody assays for predicting response to anti-Tumour Necrosis Factor treatment in Crohn’s disease : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Preview	PDF WRAP-test-accuracy-drug-antibody-assays-predicting-response-Freeman-2017.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Download (1MB) | Preview
	PDF WRAP_Freeman_test_accuracy_accepted.pdf - Accepted Version Embargoed item. Restricted access to Repository staff only - Requires a PDF viewer. Download (497kB)

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Objective:

To present meta-analytic test accuracy estimates of levels of anti-TNF and antibodies to anti-TNF to predict loss of response or lack of regaining response in anti-TNF managed Crohn’s disease
patients.

Methods:

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Science Citation Index were searched from inception to October / November 2014 to identify studies which reported 2x2 table data of the association between levels of anti-TNF or its antibodies and clinical status. Hierarchical / bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken with the user-written “metandi” package of Harbord and Whiting using Stata 11 software, for Infliximab, Adalimumab, anti-Infliximab and anti-Adalimumab levels as predictors of loss of response. Prevalence of Crohn’s disease in included studies was meta-analysed using a random effects model in MetaAnalyst software to calculate positive and negative predictive values. The search was updated in January 2017.

Results:

31 studies were included in the review. Studies were heterogeneous with respect to type of test used, criteria for establishing response and loss of response, population examined, and results. Metaanalytic summary point estimates for sensitivity and specificity were 65.7% and 80.6% for Infliximab trough levels and 56% and 79% for antibodies to Infliximab, respectively. Pooled results for Adalimumab trough levels and antibodies to Adalimumab were similar. Pooled positive and negative predictive values ranged between 70% and 80% implying that between 20% and 30% of both positive and negative test results may be incorrect in predicting loss of response.

Conclusion:

The available evidence suggests that these tests have modest predictive accuracy for clinical status, direct test accuracy comparisons in the same population are needed. More clinical trial evidence from test-treat studies is required before the clinical utility of the tests can be reliably evaluated.

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item