ArticleEndocrine connections2022
NETest: serial liquid biopsies in gastroenteropancreatic NET surveillance.
Article in Endocrine connections, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- NETest® 2.0-A decade of innovation in neuroendocrine tumor diagnostics.Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2025Article
- Comparative Targeted Genome Profiling between Solid and Liquid Biopsies in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Proof-of-Concept Pilot Study.Neuroendocrinology · 2025Article
- Review
- Biochemical Markers for Neuroendocrine Tumors: Traditional Circulating Markers and Recent Development-A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Up to now, serial NETest measurements in individuals assessing the disease course of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEPNETs) at long-term follow-up and treatment response were not studied. Design: The study was a longitudinal validation study of serial NETest measurements - a blood-based gene expression signature - in 132 patients with GEPNETs on therapy or watch-and-wait strategy. Methods: Serial samples were collected during 46 (range: 6-71) months of follow-up. NETest scores were compared with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1-defined treatment response (e.g. no evidence of disease (NED), stable disease (SD) or progressive disease (PD)). Results: Consecutive NETest scores fluctuated substantially (range: 0-100) over time in individuals with SD (n = 28) and NED (n = 30). Follow-up samples were significantly higher in SD (samples 3-5) and NED subgroups (samples 2-5) compared with baseline results, without changes in imaging. In 82% of untreated patients with PD, consecutive NETest scores consistently remained high. In patients undergoing systemic treatment, the median pre-treatment NETest score in treatment-responders was 76.5 (n = 22) vs 33 (n = 12) in non-responders (P = 0.001). Patients with low pre-treatment scores had 21 months reduced progression-free survival (10 vs 31 months; P = 0.01). The accuracy of the NETest for treatment response prediction was 0.73 (P = 0.009). Conclusion: In patients not undergoing treatment, consecutive low NETest scores are associated with indolent behavior. Patients who develop PD exhibit elevated scores. Elevated results have important predictive value for treatment responsiveness and could be used for individualizing decisions on systemic therapy. The clinical value of follow-up NETest scores for patients who choose to watch and wait requires further study.
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.