4.6 Review

Liquid Biopsy as Surrogate for Tissue for Molecular Profiling in Pancreatic Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Towards Precision Medicine

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 11, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers11081152

Keywords

liquid biopsy; cfDNA; pancreatic cancer; precision medicine; circulating tumor cells (CTC)

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Verona
  2. University of Verona Internalization Program Cooperint
  3. Associazione Italiana Ricerca Cancro (AIRC) [12182]
  4. European Community Grant Transcan Bio-PaC
  5. FP7 European Community Grant Cam-Pac [602783]
  6. Italian Health Ministry [RF-2013-02359692]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Liquid biopsy (LB) is a non-invasive approach representing a promising tool for new precision medicine strategies for cancer treatment. However, a comprehensive analysis of its reliability for pancreatic cancer (PC) is lacking. To this aim, we performed the first meta-analysis on this topic. We calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) and area under curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the overall accuracy. We finally assessed the concordance rate of all mutations detected by multi-genes panels. Fourteen eligible studies involving 369 patients were included. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.70 and 0.86, respectively. The LR+ was 3.85, the LR- was 0.34 and DOR was 15.84. The SROC curve with an AUC of 0.88 indicated a relatively high accuracy of LB for molecular characterization of PC. The concordance rate of all mutations detected by multi-genes panels was 31.9%. LB can serve as surrogate for tissue in the molecular profiling of PC, because of its relatively high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. It represents a unique opportunity to be further explored towards its introduction in clinical practice and for developing new precision medicine approaches against PC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available