SynthesisPloS one2016
Circulating Cell Free DNA as the Diagnostic Marker for Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
41 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical utility and diagnostic value of tumor-educated platelets in lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Circulating HPV cDNA in the blood as a reliable biomarker for cervical cancer: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Value of circulating cell-free DNA analysis as a diagnostic tool for breast cancer: a meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- The Prognostic Value of Circulating Tumor DNA in Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Technology in cancer research & treatmentPooled it
- Multiple biomarker algorithms to predict epithelial ovarian cancer in women with a pelvic mass: Can additional makers improve performance?Gynecologic oncology · 2019Trial
- A machine learning framework combining cfDNA fragmentomics and serum biomarkers for early ovarian cancer detection.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2026Article
- Liquid biopsy in gynecological cancers: a translational framework from molecular insights to precision oncology and clinical practice.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Review
- Breast cancer: pathogenesis and treatments.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Neutrophil extracellular traps in diseases of the female reproductive organs.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Review
- Clinical relevance of circulating tumor DNA in ovarian cancer: current issues and future opportunities.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2024Review
- Screening and identification of serum exosomal protein ZNF587B in liquid biopsy for ovarian cancer diagnosis.American journal of cancer research · 2024Article
- GD2 and GD3 gangliosides as diagnostic biomarkers for all stages and subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Increased levels of NETosis biomarkers in high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients' biofluids: Potential role in disease diagnosis and management.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Molecular Management of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Future Screening Prospects for Ovarian Cancer.Cancers · 2021Review
- Liquid biopsy as an option for predictive testing and prognosis in patients with lung cancer.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2021Article
- ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2021Review
- ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantitative analyses of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are potential methods for the detection of ovarian cancer. Many studies have evaluated these approaches, but the results were too inconsistent to be conclusive. This study is the first to systematically evaluate the accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer by conducting meta-analysis.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases systematically for relevant literatures up to December 10, 2015. All analyses were conducted using Meta-DiSc1.4 and Stata 12.0 software. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer were pooled. Meta-regression was performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity.
resultsThis meta-analysis included a total of 9 studies, including 462 ovarian cancer patients and 407 controls. The summary estimates for quantitative analysis of circulating cfDNA in ovarian cancer screen were as follows: sensitivity, 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-0.74); specificity, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.93); positive likelihood ratio, 6.60 (95% CI, 3.90-11.17); negative likelihood ratio, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.25-0.47); diagnostic odds ratio, 26.05 (95% CI, 14.67-46.26); and area under the curve, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83-0.95), respectively. There was no statistical significance for the evaluation of publication bias.
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that quantitative analysis of cfDNA has unsatisfactory sensitivity but acceptable specificity for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to validate the potential applicability of using circulating cfDNA alone or in combination with conventional markers as diagnostic biomarker for ovarian cancer and explore potential factors that may influence the accuracy of ovarian cancer diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.