IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0165628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostic Performance of Fas Ligand mRNA Expression for Acute Rejection after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Baoli Heng
  • Hongwen Ding
  • Haolin Ren
  • Liping Shi
  • Jie Chen
  • Xun Wu
  • Caiyong Lai
  • Ganshen Yu
  • Yin Xu
  • Zexuan Su

Abstract

Background: The value of Fas ligand (FASL) as a diagnostic immune marker for acute renal rejection is controversial; this meta-analysis aimed to clarify the role of FASL in acute renal rejection. Methods: The relevant literature was included by systematic searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Accuracy data for acute rejection (AR) and potential confounding variables (the year of publication, area, sample source, quantitative techniques, housekeeping genes, fluorescence staining, sample collection time post-renal transplantation, and clinical classification of AR) were extracted after carefully reviewing the studies. Data were analyzed by Meta-DiSc 1.4, RevMan 5.0, and the Midas module in Stata 11.0 software. Results: Twelve relevant studies involving 496 subjects were included. The overall pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, and diagnostic odds ratio, together with the 95% CI were 0.64 (0.57–0.70), 0.90 (0.85–0.93), 5.66 (3.51–9.11), 0.30 (0.16–0.54), and 30.63 (14.67–63.92), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.9389. Fagan’s nomogram showed that the probability of AR episodes in the kidney transplant recipient increased from 15% to 69% when FASL was positive, and was reduced to 4% when FASL was negative. No threshold effect, sensitivity analyses, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses based on the potential variables had a significant statistical change for heterogeneity. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests the diagnostic potential for FASL mRNA detection as a reliable immune marker for AR in renal allograft recipients. Further large, multicenter, prospective studies are needed to validate the power of this test marker in the non-invasive diagnosis of AR after renal transplantation.

Suggested Citation

  • Baoli Heng & Hongwen Ding & Haolin Ren & Liping Shi & Jie Chen & Xun Wu & Caiyong Lai & Ganshen Yu & Yin Xu & Zexuan Su, 2016. "Diagnostic Performance of Fas Ligand mRNA Expression for Acute Rejection after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0165628
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165628
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165628&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0165628?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yushu Shang & Weiqiang Ju & Yuan Kong & Paul M Schroder & Wenhua Liang & Xiaoting Ling & Zhiyong Guo & Xiaoshun He, 2012. "Performance of Polymerase Chain Reaction Techniques Detecting Perforin in the Diagnosis of Acute Renal Rejection: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-9, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0165628. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.