Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29525631›Full record

ArticleTranslational oncology2018

Comparison of the SuperARMS and Droplet Digital PCR for Detecting EGFR Mutation in ctDNA From NSCLC Patients.

Wei-Neng Feng, Wei-Quan Gu, Ning Zhao, Ying-Ming Pan, Wei Luo, Hua Zhang, Jian-Miao Liang, Jie Yang, Yan-Ming Deng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Journal of thoracic disease · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Detection ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Nanotechnology Strategies for the Analysis of Circulating Tumor DNA: A Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wei-Neng FengDepartment of Head and Neck/Thoracic Medical Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, PR China.
Wei-Quan GuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, PR China.
Ning ZhaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, PR China.
Ying-Ming PanClinical Research Institute, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, PR China.
Wei LuoClinical Research Institute, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, PR China.
Hua ZhangDepartment of Head and Neck/Thoracic Medical Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, PR China.
Jian-Miao LiangDepartment of Head and Neck/Thoracic Medical Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, PR China.
Jie YangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, PR China.
Yan-Ming DengDepartment of Head and Neck/Thoracic Medical Oncology, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, PR China. Electronic address: yanmingdeng78@126.com.
First People's Hospital of Foshan · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiquid biopsy is emerging as an important approach for tumor genotyping in non-small cell lung cancer, ddPCR and SuperARMS are both methods with high sensitivity and specificity for detecting EGFR mutation in plasma. We aimed to compare ddPCR and SuperARMS to detect plasma EGFR status in a cohort of advanced NSCLC patients.

methodA total of 79 tumor tissues and paired plasma samples were collected. The EGFR mutation status in tissue was tested by ADx-ARMS, matched plasma was detected by ddPCR and SuperARMS, respectively.

resultsThe EGFR mutation rates were identified as 64.6% (tissue, ARMS), 55.7% (plasma, ddPCR), and 49.4% (plasma, Super ARMS), respectively. The sensitivity of ddPCR was similar with Super-ARMS in plasma EGFR detection (80.4% vs 76.5%), as well as the specificity (89.3% vs 100%). And the McNemar's test showed there was no significant difference (P = .125). The concordance rate between SuperARMS and ddPCR was 91.1%. A significant interaction was observed between cfDNA EGFR mutation status and EGFR-TKIs treatment tested by both methods.

conclusionSuper-ARMS and ddPCR share the similar accuracy for EGFR mutation detection in plasma biopsy; both methods predicted well the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs by detecting plasma EGFR status.

Identifiers

PMID29525631
PMCPMC5884193
OpenAlexW2794066039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.