Cargando…

Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has offered a minimally invasive approach for detection and measurement of gastric cancer (GC). However, its diagnostic and prognostic value in gastric cancer still remains unclear. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies comprising 1193 GC patients met our inclusion...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gao, Yunhe, Zhang, Kecheng, Xi, Hongqing, Cai, Aizhen, Wu, Xiaosong, Cui, Jianxin, Li, Jiyang, Qiao, Zhi, Wei, Bo, Chen, Lin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Impact Journals LLC 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5351635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28009985
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14064
_version_ 1782514798752169984
author Gao, Yunhe
Zhang, Kecheng
Xi, Hongqing
Cai, Aizhen
Wu, Xiaosong
Cui, Jianxin
Li, Jiyang
Qiao, Zhi
Wei, Bo
Chen, Lin
author_facet Gao, Yunhe
Zhang, Kecheng
Xi, Hongqing
Cai, Aizhen
Wu, Xiaosong
Cui, Jianxin
Li, Jiyang
Qiao, Zhi
Wei, Bo
Chen, Lin
author_sort Gao, Yunhe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has offered a minimally invasive approach for detection and measurement of gastric cancer (GC). However, its diagnostic and prognostic value in gastric cancer still remains unclear. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies comprising 1193 GC patients met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.62 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.59−0.65) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.96), respectively. The AUSROC (area under SROC) curve was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89–0.98). The results showed that the presence of certain ctDNA markers was associated with larger tumor size (OR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.11–0.61, p = 0.002), TNM stage (I + II/III + IV, OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.07−0.17, p = 0.000), as well as H. pylori infection. (H.p negative/H.p positive, OR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.36–0.91, p = 0.018). Moreover, there was also a significant association between the presence of ctDNA and worse overall survival (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.38−2.28, p < 0.001), as well as disease-free survival (HR 4.36, 95% CI 3.08−6.16, p < 0.001). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched for relating literature published up until November 30, 2016. Diagnostic accuracy variables were pooled by the Meta-Disc software. Engauge Digitizer and Stata software were applied for prognostic data extraction and analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates the detection of certain ctDNA targets is significantly associated with poor prognosis of GC patients, with high specificity and relatively moderate sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5351635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Impact Journals LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53516352017-04-13 Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis Gao, Yunhe Zhang, Kecheng Xi, Hongqing Cai, Aizhen Wu, Xiaosong Cui, Jianxin Li, Jiyang Qiao, Zhi Wei, Bo Chen, Lin Oncotarget Research Paper BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has offered a minimally invasive approach for detection and measurement of gastric cancer (GC). However, its diagnostic and prognostic value in gastric cancer still remains unclear. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies comprising 1193 GC patients met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.62 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.59−0.65) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.96), respectively. The AUSROC (area under SROC) curve was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89–0.98). The results showed that the presence of certain ctDNA markers was associated with larger tumor size (OR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.11–0.61, p = 0.002), TNM stage (I + II/III + IV, OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.07−0.17, p = 0.000), as well as H. pylori infection. (H.p negative/H.p positive, OR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.36–0.91, p = 0.018). Moreover, there was also a significant association between the presence of ctDNA and worse overall survival (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.38−2.28, p < 0.001), as well as disease-free survival (HR 4.36, 95% CI 3.08−6.16, p < 0.001). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched for relating literature published up until November 30, 2016. Diagnostic accuracy variables were pooled by the Meta-Disc software. Engauge Digitizer and Stata software were applied for prognostic data extraction and analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates the detection of certain ctDNA targets is significantly associated with poor prognosis of GC patients, with high specificity and relatively moderate sensitivity. Impact Journals LLC 2016-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5351635/ /pubmed/28009985 http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14064 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Gao et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Gao, Yunhe
Zhang, Kecheng
Xi, Hongqing
Cai, Aizhen
Wu, Xiaosong
Cui, Jianxin
Li, Jiyang
Qiao, Zhi
Wei, Bo
Chen, Lin
Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title_full Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title_short Diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor DNA in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
title_sort diagnostic and prognostic value of circulating tumor dna in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5351635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28009985
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14064
work_keys_str_mv AT gaoyunhe diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT zhangkecheng diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT xihongqing diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT caiaizhen diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT wuxiaosong diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT cuijianxin diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT lijiyang diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT qiaozhi diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT weibo diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis
AT chenlin diagnosticandprognosticvalueofcirculatingtumordnaingastriccancerametaanalysis