Background: Several statistical models for predicting prognosis of primary membranous nephropathy (PMN) have been proposed, most of which have not been as widely accepted in clinical practice.
Methods: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE. English studies that developed any prediction models including two or more than two predictive variables were eligible for inclusion. The study population was limited to adult patients with pathologically confirmed PMN. The outcomes in eligible studies should be events relevant to prognosis of PMN, either disease progression or response profile after treatments. The risk of bias was assessed according to the PROBAST.
Results: In all, eight studies with 1237 patients were included. The pooled AUC value of the seven studies with renal function deterioration and/or ESRD as the predicted outcomes was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.90; I2 = 77%, p = 0.006). The paired forest plots for sensitivity and specificity with corresponding 95% CIs for each of these seven studies indicated the combined sensitivity and specificity were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.85) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.88), respectively. All seven studies included in the meta-analysis were assessed as high risk of bias according to the PROBAST tool.
Conclusions: The reported discrimination ability of included models was good; however, the insufficient calibration assessment and lack of validation studies precluded drawing a definitive conclusion on the performance of these prediction models. High-grade evidence from well-designed studies is needed in this field.
Keywords: meta-analysis; prediction models; primary membranous nephropathy; systematic review.