Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34427680›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Assessment of the Diagnostic Efficiency of a Liquid Biopsy Assay for Early Detection of Gastric Cancer.

Daisuke Izumi, Zhongxu Zhu, Yuetong Chen, Shusuke Toden, Xinying Huo, Mitsuro Kanda, Takatsugu Ishimoto, Dongying Gu, Miaomiao Tan, Yasuhiro Kodera and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

15 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Daisuke IzumiCenter for Gastrointestinal Research, Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Zhongxu ZhuDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Yuetong ChenDepartment of Oncology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Shusuke TodenCenter for Gastrointestinal Research, Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Xinying HuoDepartment of Oncology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Mitsuro KandaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Takatsugu IshimotoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Dongying GuDepartment of Oncology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Miaomiao TanDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Yasuhiro KoderaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Hideo BabaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Wei LiDepartment of Biological Chemistry, School of Medicine, University of California, Irvine.
Jinfei ChenDepartment of Oncology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Xin WangDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ajay GoelCenter for Gastrointestinal Research, Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
City University of Hong Kong · HKNagoya University · JPNanjing Medical University · CNBaylor Medical Center at Garland · USKumamoto Medical Center · JPNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CNUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Noninvasive detection of early-stage disease is a key strategy for reducing gastric cancer (GC)-associated patient mortality. Objective: To establish a novel, noninvasive, microRNA (miRNA)-based signature for the early detection of GC using a comprehensive biomarker discovery approach with retrospective and prospective validation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study was conducted in 4 phases using publicly available genome sequences and tissue samples from patients at an academic medical center in Japan, and validated with retrospective multicenter cohorts of patients with GC. Three tissue miRNA data sets were used to identify a miRNA signature that discriminated GC vs normal tissues. The robustness of this signature was assessed in serum from 2 retrospective cohorts of patients with GC. A risk-scoring model was derived, then the performance of the miRNA signature was evaluated in a prospective cohort of patients with GC. The robustness of the miRNA signature was compared with current blood-based markers, and a cost-effectiveness analysis of the miRNA signature against the current practice of endoscopy was performed. All clinical samples used for this study were collected and data analyzed between April 1997 and March 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Assessment of diagnostic efficiency on the basis of area under the curve (AUC), specificity, and sensitivity. Results: The data sets for the genome-wide expression profiling analysis stage included 598 total patient samples (284 [55.4%] from men; mean [SE] patient age, 65.7 [0.5] years). The resulting 10-miRNA signature was validated in 2 retrospective GC serum cohorts (586 patients; 348 [59.4%] men, mean [SE] age, 66.0 [0.7] years), which led to the establishment of a 5-miRNA signature (AUC, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.94) that also exhibited high levels of diagnostic performance in patients with stage I disease (AUC, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94). A risk-scoring model was derived and the assay was optimized to a minimal number of miRNAs. The performance of the resulting 3-miRNA signature was then validated in a prospective cohort of patients with GC (349 patients; 124 [70.5%] men, median [range] age, 66.0 [0.66] years). The final 3-miRNA signature (miR-18a, miR-181b, and miR-335) exhibited high diagnostic accuracy in all stages of patients (AUC, 0.86; 95% CI 0.83-0.90), including in patients with stage I disease (AUC, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91). Furthermore, this miRNA signature was superior to currently used blood markers and outperformed the endoscopic screening in a cost-effectiveness analysis (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, CNY ¥16162.5 per quality-adjusted life-year [USD $2304.80 per quality-adjusted life-year]). Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest the potential clinical significance of the 3-miRNA signature as a noninvasive, cost-effective, and facile assay for the early detection of GC.

Indexed as

Liquid BiopsyAgedCirculating MicroRNADiagnosis, DifferentialEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityStomach NeoplasmsCirculating MicroRNA

Identifiers

PMID34427680
PMCPMC8385601
OpenAlexW3194424047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.