Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis

K. A. Broeze; B. C. Opmeer; S. F. P. J. Coppus; N. van Geloven; M. F. C. Alves; G. Anestad; S. Bhattacharya; J. Allan; M. F. Guerra-Infante; J. E. den Hartog; J. A. Land; A. Idahl; P. J. Q. van der Linden; J. W. Mouton; E. H. Y. Ng; J. W. van der Steeg; P. Steures; H. F. Svenstrup; A. Tiitinen; B. Toye; F. van der Veen; B. W. Mol

doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis

K. A. Broeze, B. C. Opmeer, S. F. P. J. Coppus, N. van Geloven, M. F. C. Alves, G. Anestad, S. Bhattacharya, J. Allan, M. F. Guerra-Infante, J. E. den Hartog, J. A. Land, A. Idahl, P. J. Q. van der Linden, J. W. Mouton, E. H. Y. Ng, J. W. van der Steeg, P. Steures, H. F. Svenstrup, A. Tiitinen, B. ToyeF. van der Veen, B. W. Mol

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Academic › peer-review

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Chlamydia IgG antibody test (CAT) shows considerable variations in reported estimates of test accuracy, partly because of the use of different assays and cut-off values. The aim of this study was to reassess the accuracy of CAT in diagnosing tubal pathology by individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis for three different CAT assays. METHODS: We approached authors of primary studies that used micro-immunofluorescence tests (MIF), immunofluorescence tests (IF) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests (ELISA). Using the obtained IPD, we performed pooled receiver operator characteristics analysis and logistic regression analysis with a random effects model to compare the three assays. Tubal pathology was defined as either any tubal obstruction or bilateral tubal obstruction. RESULTS: We acquired data of 14 primary studies containing data of 6191 women, of which data of 3453 women were available for analysis. The areas under the curve for ELISA, IF and MIF were 0.64, 0.65 and 0.75, respectively (P-value, <0.001) for any tubal pathology and 0.66, 0.66 and 0.77, respectively (P-value = 0.01) for bilateral tubal pathology. CONCLUSIONS: In Chlamydia antibody testing, MIF is superior in the assessment of tubal pathology. In the initial screen for tubal pathology MIF should therefore be the test of first choice

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	301-310
Journal	Human Reproduction Update
Volume	17
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060
Publication status	Published - 2011

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

Cite this

Broeze, K. A., Opmeer, B. C., Coppus, S. F. P. J., van Geloven, N., Alves, M. F. C., Anestad, G., Bhattacharya, S., Allan, J., Guerra-Infante, M. F., den Hartog, J. E., Land, J. A., Idahl, A., van der Linden, P. J. Q., Mouton, J. W., Ng, E. H. Y., van der Steeg, J. W., Steures, P., Svenstrup, H. F., Tiitinen, A., ... Mol, B. W. (2011). Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update, 17(3), 301-310. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

@article{d584a11fda1f49c3a56fda680f889976,

title = "Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: The Chlamydia IgG antibody test (CAT) shows considerable variations in reported estimates of test accuracy, partly because of the use of different assays and cut-off values. The aim of this study was to reassess the accuracy of CAT in diagnosing tubal pathology by individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis for three different CAT assays. METHODS: We approached authors of primary studies that used micro-immunofluorescence tests (MIF), immunofluorescence tests (IF) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests (ELISA). Using the obtained IPD, we performed pooled receiver operator characteristics analysis and logistic regression analysis with a random effects model to compare the three assays. Tubal pathology was defined as either any tubal obstruction or bilateral tubal obstruction. RESULTS: We acquired data of 14 primary studies containing data of 6191 women, of which data of 3453 women were available for analysis. The areas under the curve for ELISA, IF and MIF were 0.64, 0.65 and 0.75, respectively (P-value, <0.001) for any tubal pathology and 0.66, 0.66 and 0.77, respectively (P-value = 0.01) for bilateral tubal pathology. CONCLUSIONS: In Chlamydia antibody testing, MIF is superior in the assessment of tubal pathology. In the initial screen for tubal pathology MIF should therefore be the test of first choice",

author = "Broeze, {K. A.} and Opmeer, {B. C.} and Coppus, {S. F. P. J.} and {van Geloven}, N. and Alves, {M. F. C.} and G. Anestad and S. Bhattacharya and J. Allan and Guerra-Infante, {M. F.} and {den Hartog}, {J. E.} and Land, {J. A.} and A. Idahl and {van der Linden}, {P. J. Q.} and Mouton, {J. W.} and Ng, {E. H. Y.} and {van der Steeg}, {J. W.} and P. Steures and Svenstrup, {H. F.} and A. Tiitinen and B. Toye and {van der Veen}, F. and Mol, {B. W.}",

year = "2011",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060",

language = "English",

volume = "17",

pages = "301--310",

journal = "Human Reproduction Update",

issn = "1355-4786",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "3",

}

Broeze, KA, Opmeer, BC, Coppus, SFPJ, van Geloven, N, Alves, MFC, Anestad, G, Bhattacharya, S, Allan, J, Guerra-Infante, MF, den Hartog, JE, Land, JA, Idahl, A, van der Linden, PJQ, Mouton, JW, Ng, EHY, van der Steeg, JW, Steures, P, Svenstrup, HF, Tiitinen, A, Toye, B, van der Veen, F & Mol, BW 2011, 'Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis', Human Reproduction Update, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 301-310. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

TY - JOUR

T1 - Chlamydia antibody testing and diagnosing tubal pathology in subfertile women: an individual patient data meta-analysis

AU - Broeze, K. A.

AU - Opmeer, B. C.

AU - Coppus, S. F. P. J.

AU - van Geloven, N.

AU - Alves, M. F. C.

AU - Anestad, G.

AU - Bhattacharya, S.

AU - Allan, J.

AU - Guerra-Infante, M. F.

AU - den Hartog, J. E.

AU - Land, J. A.

AU - Idahl, A.

AU - van der Linden, P. J. Q.

AU - Mouton, J. W.

AU - Ng, E. H. Y.

AU - van der Steeg, J. W.

AU - Steures, P.

AU - Svenstrup, H. F.

AU - Tiitinen, A.

AU - Toye, B.

AU - van der Veen, F.

AU - Mol, B. W.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - BACKGROUND: The Chlamydia IgG antibody test (CAT) shows considerable variations in reported estimates of test accuracy, partly because of the use of different assays and cut-off values. The aim of this study was to reassess the accuracy of CAT in diagnosing tubal pathology by individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis for three different CAT assays. METHODS: We approached authors of primary studies that used micro-immunofluorescence tests (MIF), immunofluorescence tests (IF) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests (ELISA). Using the obtained IPD, we performed pooled receiver operator characteristics analysis and logistic regression analysis with a random effects model to compare the three assays. Tubal pathology was defined as either any tubal obstruction or bilateral tubal obstruction. RESULTS: We acquired data of 14 primary studies containing data of 6191 women, of which data of 3453 women were available for analysis. The areas under the curve for ELISA, IF and MIF were 0.64, 0.65 and 0.75, respectively (P-value, <0.001) for any tubal pathology and 0.66, 0.66 and 0.77, respectively (P-value = 0.01) for bilateral tubal pathology. CONCLUSIONS: In Chlamydia antibody testing, MIF is superior in the assessment of tubal pathology. In the initial screen for tubal pathology MIF should therefore be the test of first choice

AB - BACKGROUND: The Chlamydia IgG antibody test (CAT) shows considerable variations in reported estimates of test accuracy, partly because of the use of different assays and cut-off values. The aim of this study was to reassess the accuracy of CAT in diagnosing tubal pathology by individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis for three different CAT assays. METHODS: We approached authors of primary studies that used micro-immunofluorescence tests (MIF), immunofluorescence tests (IF) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests (ELISA). Using the obtained IPD, we performed pooled receiver operator characteristics analysis and logistic regression analysis with a random effects model to compare the three assays. Tubal pathology was defined as either any tubal obstruction or bilateral tubal obstruction. RESULTS: We acquired data of 14 primary studies containing data of 6191 women, of which data of 3453 women were available for analysis. The areas under the curve for ELISA, IF and MIF were 0.64, 0.65 and 0.75, respectively (P-value, <0.001) for any tubal pathology and 0.66, 0.66 and 0.77, respectively (P-value = 0.01) for bilateral tubal pathology. CONCLUSIONS: In Chlamydia antibody testing, MIF is superior in the assessment of tubal pathology. In the initial screen for tubal pathology MIF should therefore be the test of first choice

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

DO - https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq060

M3 - Review article

C2 - 21227996

SN - 1355-4786

VL - 17

SP - 301

EP - 310

JO - Human Reproduction Update

JF - Human Reproduction Update

IS - 3

ER -