Table 3.
Summary of very good diagnostic accuracy of CRP measurements.
| Reference | Biomarker | POD | Cut-Off Values | AUROC | Sensitivity | SPECIFICITY | NPV | PPV | AL (n) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asti et al. [32] | CRP | 5 | 83 mg/L | 0.818 | 89.3% | 60.8% | 97.7% | 23.1% | 29/243 |
| Dutta et al. [34] | CRP | 3 | 180 mg/L | 0.808 | 82.0% | 63.0% | NR | NR | 17/136 |
| 4 | 180 mg/L | 0.857 | 71.0% | 83.0% | NR | NR | 17/136 | ||
| Giulini et al. [46] | CRP | 2 | 299 mg/L | 0.902 | 100.0% | 75.0% | NR | NR | 4/80 |
| Gordon et al. [36] | CRP | 2 | 209 mg/L | 0.819 | 100.0% | 64.0% | 100.0% | 21.0% | 13/145 |
| 3 | 190 mg/L | 0.836 | 100.0% | 61.0% | 100.0% | 20.0% | 13/145 | ||
| 6 | 154 mg/L | 0.907 | 100.0% | 80.0% | 100.0% | 33.0% | 13/145 | ||
| Hoeboer et al. [37] | CRP | Δ0-3 | 55 | 0.820 | 80.0% | 80.0% | 94.0% | 50.0% | 10/45 |
| Ji et al. [39] | CRP | 1 | 117 mg/L | 0.994 | 90.0% | 89.0% | NR | NR | 10/97 |
| 2 | 177 mg/L | 0.908 | 90.0% | 95.0% | NR | NR | 10/97 | ||
| 3 | 153 mg/L | 0.936 | 90.0% | 89.0% | NR | NR | 10/97 | ||
| 4 | 89 mg/L | 0.917 | 90.0% | 95.0% | NR | NR | 10/97 | ||
| 5 | 92 mg/L | 0.881 | 90.0% | 95.0% | NR | NR | 10/97 | ||
| Park et al. [42] | CRP (non-NT) | 3 | 171.2 mg/L | 0.822 | 69.2% | 78.1% | NR | NR | 15/156 |
| CRP (non-NT/MIE) | 3 | 128.6 mg/L | 0.800 | 83.3% | 64.9% | NR | NR | NR/89 | |
| CRP (non-NT/OE) | 3 | 179.4 mg/L | 0.834 | 71.4% | 72.0% | NR | NR | NR/67 |
a Fractional change, value day 3 divided by day 0; POD, postoperative day; AUROC, area under receiver operating curve; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; AL (n), patients with AL/study population; CRP, C-reactive protein; Non-NT, non-neoadjuvant therapy; MIE, minimally invasive esophagectomy; OE, open esophagectomy; NR, not reported.