Protein-creatinine ratio and albumin-creatinine ratio for the diagnosis of significant proteinuria in pregnant women with hypertension: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for assessment and diagnosis of significant proteinuria in pregnancy has been by 24-hour urine collection and analysis. Determining fast, accurate methods to identify clinically significant proteinuria would aid diagnosis of pre-eclampsia. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of spot protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) measurements compared with 24-hour urine collection for the identification of clinically significant proteinuria in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. METHODS: Search strategies were developed for electronic databases from inception to 1st October 2020. Data were assessed for methodological quality using the QUADAS-II checklist for risk of bias and quality of the evidence using GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed where there were at least four studies presenting data for the same comparison (test and threshold). This is an update of the review for NICE guideline NG133 (published June 2019) and includes additional data. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included. PCR measurements (28 studies) showed high sensitivity (91%) and specificity (89%) at a threshold of 30 mg/mmol (n = 3577). Higher thresholds (>60 mg/mmol) increased specificity, but reduced sensitivity. At a threshold of PCR 30 mg/mmol, diagnostic accuracy improved for sensitivity and specificity (93% for both) in studies where the first morning void was excluded (n = 1868). Data available (4 studies) for ACR supports ruling out of significant proteinuria at less than 2 mg/mmol, though evidence was limited by paucity of data and wide confidence intervals around the result. CONCLUSIONS: PCR and ACR have high accuracy compared to the gold standard 24-hour urine collection.

Dietary patterns derived from principal component analysis (PCA) and risk of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is highly prevalent worldwide, with dietary habits being a major risk factor. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed the observational evidence on the association between CRC and dietary patterns (DP) derived from principal component analysis. DESIGN: PRISMA guidelines were followed. Web of Science, Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched to identify all eligible papers published up to the 31st July 2017. Any pre-defined cancer of the colon was included, namely colon-rectal cancer (CRC), colon cancer (CC), rectal cancer (RC), or proximal and distal CC, if available. Western (WDP) and prudent (PDP) dietary patterns were compared as a proxy to estimate "unhealthy" (Rich in meat and processed foods) and "healthy" diets (containing fruits or vegetables), respectively. Meta-analyses were carried out using random effects model to calculate overall risk estimates. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated comparing the highest versus the lowest categories of dietary patterns for any of the forms of colon cancer studied. RESULTS: 28 studies were meta-analysed. A WDP was associated with increased risk of CRC (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.11, 1.40), and of CC (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.11, 1.52). A PDP was negatively associated with CRC (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73, 0.91). Sensitivity analyses showed that individuals from North-and South-American countries had a significantly higher risk of CRC than those from other continents. CONCLUSION: A PDP might reduce the risk of CRC. Conversely, a WDP is associated with a higher risk of disease.

Timing of Allergenic Food Introduction to the Infant Diet and Risk of Allergic or Autoimmune Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Timing of introduction of allergenic foods to the infant diet may influence the risk of allergic or autoimmune disease, but the evidence for this has not been comprehensively synthesized. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-analyze evidence that timing of allergenic food introduction during infancy influences risk of allergic or autoimmune disease. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and LILACS databases were searched between January 1946 and March 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Intervention trials and observational studies that evaluated timing of allergenic food introduction during the first year of life and reported allergic or autoimmune disease or allergic sensitization were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted in duplicate and synthesized for meta-analysis using generic inverse variance or Mantel-Haenszel methods with a random-effects model. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Wheeze, eczema, allergic rhinitis, food allergy, allergic sensitization, type 1 diabetes mellitus, celiac disease, inflammatory bowel disease, autoimmune thyroid disease, and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. RESULTS: Of 16 289 original titles screened, data were extracted from 204 titles reporting 146 studies. There was moderate-certainty evidence from 5 trials (1915 participants) that early egg introduction at 4 to 6 months was associated with reduced egg allergy (risk ratio [RR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87; I2 = 36%; P = .009). Absolute risk reduction for a population with 5.4% incidence of egg allergy was 24 cases (95% CI, 7-35 cases) per 1000 population. There was moderate-certainty evidence from 2 trials (1550 participants) that early peanut introduction at 4 to 11 months was associated with reduced peanut allergy (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11-0.74; I2 = 66%; P = .009). Absolute risk reduction for a population with 2.5% incidence of peanut allergy was 18 cases (95% CI, 6-22 cases) per 1000 population. Certainty of evidence was downgraded because of imprecision of effect estimates and indirectness of the populations and interventions studied. Timing of egg or peanut introduction was not associated with risk of allergy to other foods. There was low- to very low-certainty evidence that early fish introduction was associated with reduced allergic sensitization and rhinitis. There was high-certainty evidence that timing of gluten introduction was not associated with celiac disease risk, and timing of allergenic food introduction was not associated with other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this systematic review, early egg or peanut introduction to the infant diet was associated with lower risk of developing egg or peanut allergy. These findings must be considered in the context of limitations in the primary studies.

Hydrolysed formula and risk of allergic or autoimmune disease: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether feeding infants with hydrolysed formula reduces their risk of allergic or autoimmune disease. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis, as part of a series of systematic reviews commissioned by the UK Food Standards Agency to inform guidelines on infant feeding. Two authors selected studies by consensus, independently extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and LILACS searched between January 1946 and April 2015. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Prospective intervention trials of hydrolysed cows' milk formula compared with another hydrolysed formula, human breast milk, or a standard cows' milk formula, which reported on allergic or autoimmune disease or allergic sensitisation. RESULTS: 37 eligible intervention trials of hydrolysed formula were identified, including over 19,000 participants. There was evidence of conflict of interest and high or unclear risk of bias in most studies of allergic outcomes and evidence of publication bias for studies of eczema and wheeze. Overall there was no consistent evidence that partially or extensively hydrolysed formulas reduce risk of allergic or autoimmune outcomes in infants at high pre-existing risk of these outcomes. Odds ratios for eczema at age 0-4, compared with standard cows' milk formula, were 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.07; I(2)=30%) for partially hydrolysed formula; 0.55 (0.28 to 1.09; I(2)=74%) for extensively hydrolysed casein based formula; and 1.12 (0.88 to 1.42; I(2)=0%) for extensively hydrolysed whey based formula. There was no evidence to support the health claim approved by the US Food and Drug Administration that a partially hydrolysed formula could reduce the risk of eczema nor the conclusion of the Cochrane review that hydrolysed formula could allergy to cows' milk. CONCLUSION: These findings do not support current guidelines that recommend the use of hydrolysed formula to prevent allergic disease in high risk infants. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42013004252.