Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33301466›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2020

A combination of urinary biomarker panel and PancRISK score for earlier detection of pancreatic cancer: A case-control study.

Silvana Debernardi, Harrison O'Brien, Asma S Algahmdi, Nuria Malats, Grant D Stewart, Marija Plješa-Ercegovac, Eithne Costello, William Greenhalf, Amina Saad, Rhiannon Roberts and 6 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04449406 (Early Detection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT04449406 active not recruitingnot on this map

Early Detection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) Using a Panel of Biomarkers (UroPanc)

TypeobservationalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2020 to 2026Enrolled3,500ConditionsPancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Challenges of early detection of pancreatic cancer.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025
    Review
  5. Proteomics in pancreatic cancer.Biomarker research · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Data privacy-aware machine learning approach in pancreatic cancer diagnosis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

16 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Silvana DebernardiCentre for Cancer Biomarkers and Biotherapeutics, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3286-8632
Harrison O'BrienCentre for Cancer Biomarkers and Biotherapeutics, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Asma S AlgahmdiCentre for Cancer Biomarkers and Biotherapeutics, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3318-1963
Nuria MalatsCentro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2538-3784
Grant D StewartDepartment of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3188-9140
Marija Plješa-ErcegovacInstitute of Medical and Clinical Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0001-8969-0594
Eithne CostelloMolecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0104-8992
William GreenhalfMolecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1865-3195
Amina SaadCentre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Rhiannon RobertsCentre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9561-0001
Alexander NeyInstitute for Liver and Digestive Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4868-2832
Stephen P PereiraInstitute for Liver and Digestive Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0821-1809
Hemant M KocherCentre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6771-1905
Stephen DuffyCentre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4901-7922
Oleg BlyussSchool of Physics, Astronomy and Mathematics, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0194-6389
Tatjana Crnogorac-JurcevicCentre for Cancer Biomarkers and Biotherapeutics, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Queen Mary University of London · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBSpanish National Cancer Research Centre · ESUniversity of Belgrade · RSUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 26881Department of Health PB-PG-0712-28114Medical Research Council G0801588
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest cancers, with around 9% of patients surviving >5 years. Asymptomatic in its initial stages, PDAC is mostly diagnosed late, when already a locally advanced or metastatic disease, as there are no useful biomarkers for detection in its early stages, when surgery can be curative. We have previously described a promising biomarker panel (LYVE1, REG1A, and TFF1) for earlier detection of PDAC in urine. Here, we aimed to establish the accuracy of an improved panel, including REG1B instead of REG1A, and an algorithm for data interpretation, the PancRISK score, in additional retrospectively collected urine specimens. We also assessed the complementarity of this panel with CA19-9 and explored the daily variation and stability of the biomarkers and their performance in common urinary tract cancers. METHODS AND

findingsClinical specimens were obtained from multiple centres: Barts Pancreas Tissue Bank, University College London, University of Liverpool, Spanish National Cancer Research Center, Cambridge University Hospital, and University of Belgrade. The biomarker panel was assayed on 590 urine specimens: 183 control samples, 208 benign hepatobiliary disease samples (of which 119 were chronic pancreatitis), and 199 PDAC samples (102 stage I-II and 97 stage III-IV); 50.7% were from female individuals. PDAC samples were collected from patients before treatment. The samples were assayed using commercially available ELISAs. Statistical analyses were performed using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests adjusted for multiple comparisons, and multiple logistic regression. Training and validation datasets for controls and PDAC samples were obtained after random division of the whole available dataset in a 1:1 ratio. The substitution of REG1A with REG1B enhanced the performance of the panel to detect resectable PDAC. In a comparison of controls and PDAC stage I-II samples, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) increased from 0.900 (95% CI 0.843-0.957) and 0.926 (95% CI 0.843-1.000) in the training (50% of the dataset) and validation sets, respectively, to 0.936 in both the training (95% CI 0.903-0.969) and the validation (95% CI 0.888-0.984) datasets for the new panel including REG1B. This improved panel showed both sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) to be >85%. Plasma CA19-9 enhanced the performance of this panel in discriminating PDAC I-II patients from controls, with AUC = 0.992 (95% CI 0.983-1.000), SN = 0.963 (95% CI 0.913-1.000), and SP = 0.967 (95% CI 0.924-1.000). We demonstrate that the biomarkers do not show significant daily variation, and that they are stable for up to 5 days at room temperature. The main limitation of our study is the low number of stage I-IIA PDAC samples (n = 27) and lack of samples from individuals with hereditary predisposition to PDAC, for which specimens collected from control individuals were used as a proxy.

conclusionsWe have successfully validated our urinary biomarker panel, which was improved by substituting REG1A with REG1B. At a pre-selected cutoff of >80% SN and SP for the affiliated PancRISK score, we demonstrate a clinically applicable risk stratification tool with a binary output for risk of developing PDAC ('elevated' or 'normal'). PancRISK provides a step towards precision surveillance for PDAC patients, which we will test in a prospective clinical study, UroPanc.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntigens, Tumor-Associated, CarbohydrateBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalEuropeFemaleHumansLithostathineMaleMiddle AgedPancreatic NeoplasmsPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsAntigens, Tumor-Associated, CarbohydrateBiomarkers, Tumorcarbohydrate antigen 199, humanLithostathineLYVE1 protein, humanREG1A protein, humanREG1B protein, humanTFF1 protein, humanTrefoil Factor-1Vesicular Transport Proteins

Identifiers

PMID33301466
PMCPMC7758047
OpenAlexW3111000697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.