SynthesisCancer medicine2020
Diagnostic performance of various liquid biopsy methods in detecting colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prognostic value of extracellular vesicles in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of various liquid biopsy methods in detecting colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Circulating N6-methyladenosine RNA as a diagnostic and a stage-associated prognostic biomarker in colorectal cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Clinical application of liquid biopsy in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: taking ctDNA for example-a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Exosomes as Emerging Non-Invasive Biomarkers of Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2025Review
- Proteomic insights into early pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma biology and screening.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Potentialities and critical issues of liquid biopsy in clinical practice: An umbrella review.Translational oncology · 2025Review
- Screening and identification of serum exosomal protein ZNF587B in liquid biopsy for ovarian cancer diagnosis.American journal of cancer research · 2024Article
- Integrating a microRNA signature as a liquid biopsy-based tool for the early diagnosis and prediction of potential therapeutic targets in pancreatic cancer.British journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Blood-based biomarkers and novel technologies for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and adenomas: a narrative review.Biomarkers in medicine · 2024Review
- Ibero-American Consensus Review and Incorporation of New Biomarkers for Clinical Practice in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2023Review
- Circulating tumor DNA sequencing of pediatric solid and brain tumor patients: An institutional feasibility study.Pediatric hematology and oncology · 2023Article
- Pancreatic Cancer: Pathogenesis, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Gastroenterology · 2022Review
- The role of exosomes in liquid biopsy for cancer diagnosis and prognosis prediction.International journal of cancer · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liquid biopsy is a promising method in detecting colorectal cancer (CRC). However, previous meta-analyses only focused on the diagnostic performance of cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Therefore, we firstly evaluated the overall performance of all liquid biopsy methods. The pooled sensitivities, specificities, diagnostic odds ratios, and area under curve (AUC) of summary receiver operating characteristic curve for all liquid biopsy methods, exosomes, circulating tumor cells (CTCs), and cfDNA were calculated, respectively. A total of 62 articles involving 18 739 individuals were included. Fifty-one articles were about cfDNA, five articles were about CTCs, and six articles were about exosomes. The overall performance of all liquid biopsy methods had a pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.78), 0.89 (95% CI 0.88-0.90), and 0.9004, respectively. The sensitivities were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85), 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.80), and 0.76 (95% CI 0.75-0.77) for CTCs, exosomes, and cfDNA, respectively. The specificities were 0.97 (95% CI95% CI 0.95-0.99), 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.87-0.89) for CTCs, exosomes, and cfDNA, respectively. The AUC were 0.9772, 0.9037, and 0.8963 for CTCs, exosomes, and cfDNA, respectively. The overall performance of all liquid biopsy methods had great diagnostic value in detecting CRC, regardless of subtypes. Among all liquid biopsy methods, CTCs showed the best diagnostic performance.
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.