Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
JBI Evid Synth ; 2024 Aug 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39188132

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the currently available and upcoming point-of-care rapid antigen tests (RATs) used in primary care settings relative to the viral genetic real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test as a reference for diagnosing COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 in adults. INTRODUCTION: Accurate COVID-19 point-of-care diagnostic tests are required for real-time identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection in individuals. Real-time RT-PCR is the accepted gold standard for diagnostic testing, requiring technical expertise and expensive equipment that are unavailable in most primary care locations. RATs are immunoassays that detect the presence of a specific viral protein, which implies a current infection with SARS-CoV-2. RATs are qualitative or semi-quantitative diagnostics that lack thresholds that provide a result within a short time frame, typically within the hour following sample collection. In this systematic review, we synthesized the current evidence regarding the accuracy of RATs for detecting SARS-CoV-2 compared with RT-PCR. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies that included nonpregnant adults (18 years or older) with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of symptomology or disease severity, were included. The index test was any available SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care RAT. The reference test was any commercially distributed RT-PCR-based test that detects the RNA genome of SARS-CoV-2 and has been validated by an independent third party. Custom or in-house RT-PCR tests were also considered, with appropriate validation documentation. The diagnosis of interest was COVID-19 disease and SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review considered cross-sectional and cohort studies that examined the diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection where the participants had both index and reference tests performed. METHODS: The keywords and index terms contained in relevant articles were used to develop a full search strategy for PubMed and adapted for Embase, Scopus, Qinsight, and the WHO COVID-19 databases . Studies published from November 2019 to July 12, 2022, were included, as SARS-CoV-2 emerged in late 2019 and is the cause of a continuing pandemic. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were critically appraised using QUADAS-2. Using a customized tool, data were extracted from included studies and were verified prior to analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values were calculated and presented with 95% CIs. When heterogeneity was observed, outlier analysis was conducted, and the results were generated by removing outliers. RESULTS: Meta-analysis was performed on 91 studies of 581 full-text articles retrieved that provided true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative values. RATs can identify individuals who have COVID-19 with high reliability (positive predictive value 97.7%; negative predictive value 95.2%) when considering overall performance. However, the lower level of sensitivity (67.1%) suggests that negative test results likely need to be retested through an additional method. CONCLUSIONS: Most reported RAT brands had only a few studies comparing their performance with RT-PCR. Overall, a positive RAT result is an excellent predictor of a positive diagnosis of COVID-19. We recommend that Roche's SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test and Abbott's BinaxNOW tests be used in primary care settings, with the understanding that negative results need to be confirmed through RT-PCR. We recommend adherence to the STARD guidelines when reporting on diagnostic data. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020224250.

2.
Prev Med Rep ; 38: 102590, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38283967

RESUMO

Objective: Cervical cancer screening coverage remains low in many countries worldwide. Self-sampling approach for cervical cancer screening has a good potential to improve the screening coverage. This study aims to compare different types of HPV self-sampling devices for cervical cancer screening to identify the most accurate and acceptable device(s). Methods: A systematic review was performed on data extracted from all studies specific to HPV self-sampling devices by searching relevant articles in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO published from 2013 to October 2023. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022375682). Results: Overall, 70 papers met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and were included in the analysis: 22 studies reported self-sampling devices diagnostic accuracy, 32 studies reported self-sampling devices acceptability and 16 studies reported both (accuracy and acceptability). The most popular self-sampling devices were Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Cervex-Brush, and Delphi Screener. Out of overall 38 studies analyzing self-sampling devices' diagnostic accuracy, 94.7% of studies reported that self-collected specimens provided sensitivity and specificity comparable with clinician-collected samples; acceptability of Evalyn Brush, FLOQ Swab, Delphi Screener, and Colli-Pee, varied between 84.2% and 100%. Conclusion: The self-sampling approach has a good potential to increase cervical cancer screening coverage. Evalyn Brush, Cervex-Brush, FLOQ Swab, and Delphi Screener self-sampling devices for HPV detection were the most commonly utilized and found to be the most accurate, and patient-acceptable. HPV detection accuracy using these self-sampling devices had no significant difference compared to the sampling performed by healthcare providers.

3.
PLoS One ; 14(7): e0219398, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31276572

RESUMO

The overall survival for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains low, with little progress made over decades. Cisplatin, most frequently used for HNSCC treatment, activates mitochondria-dependent apoptosis through the BCL-2 family proteins. We have previously demonstrated that the pro-apoptotic BH3-only protein, NOXA plays a critical role in this process. NOXA binds and inactivates anti-apoptotic MCL-1, while the BCL-2 inhibitor ABT-263 is capable of inactivating anti-apoptotic BCL-2 and BCL-XL. We hypothesized that combination of NOXA and ABT-263 treatment increases cell death by simultaneously inhibiting anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family proteins in HNSCC cells. Here, we demonstrated that combination of ectopic NOXA expression and ABT-263 enhanced apoptosis in p53-inactive, p53 wild-type, and human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive HNSCC cell lines. Furthermore, a retinoid derivative and an endoplasmic reticulum stress inducer, fenretinide, induced NOXA, and combination of fenretinide and ABT-263 strongly induced apoptosis in HNSCC cells regardless of the HPV or p53 statuses. We also found that MCL-1 and BCL-XL are the primary targets of apoptosis induced by the combinations. These results will develop novel and alternative therapeutic strategies to directly modify the cell death machinery in HNSCC.


Assuntos
Compostos de Anilina/farmacologia , Antineoplásicos/farmacologia , Apoptose/efeitos dos fármacos , Fenretinida/farmacologia , NADPH Oxidase 2/genética , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeça e Pescoço/genética , Sulfonamidas/farmacologia , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Expressão Ectópica do Gene/genética , Humanos , NADPH Oxidase 2/metabolismo , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas de Cabeça e Pescoço/metabolismo , Proteína bcl-X/metabolismo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA