4.5 Review

Liquid biopsy prediction of axillary lymph node metastasis, cancer recurrence, and patient survival in breast cancer A meta-analysis

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 97, 期 42, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012862

关键词

breast cancer; liquid biopsy; lymph node metastasis; meta-analysis; survival

资金

  1. Mid-career Researcher Program through National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [2016 R1A2B4012030]
  2. Korea University Ansan Hospital [K1811011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Liquid biopsies using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) have been developed for early cancer detection and patient monitoring. To investigate the clinical usefulness of ctDNA aberrations and cfDNA levels in patients with breast cancer (BC), we conducted a meta-analysis of 69 published studies on 5736 patients with BC. Methods: The relevant publications were identified by searching PubMed and Embase databases. The effect sizes of outcome parameters were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: The ctDNA mutation rates of TP53, PIK3CA, and ESR1 were approximately 38%, 27%, and 32%, respectively. High levels of cfDNA were associated with BCs rather than with healthy controls. However, these detection rates were not satisfactory for BC screening. Although the precise mechanisms have been unknown, high cfDNA levels were significantly associated with axillary lymph node metastasis (odds ratio [OR]= 2.148, P=.030). The ctDNA mutations were significantly associated with cancer recurrence (OR= 3.793, P<.001), short disease-free survival (univariate hazard ratio [HR]= 5.180, P=.026; multivariate HR=3.605, P=.001), and progression-free survival (HR=1.311, P=.013) rates, and poor overall survival outcomes (HR=2.425, P=.007). Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that ctDNA mutation status predicts disease recurrence and unfavorable survival outcomes, while cfDNA levels can be predictive of axillary lymph node metastasis in patients with BC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据