Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38019327›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuro-oncology2023

Liquid biopsy in the setting of leptomeningeal metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jeremiah H Wijaya, Utsav D Patel, Miguel D Quintero-Consuegra, Maria P Aguilera-Peña, Humberto J Madriñán-Navia, Aulia W Putra, Julius July, Saurabh Kataria

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis in gastric cancer: A Review.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Jeremiah H WijayaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitas Pelita Harapan, Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia. jeremiah.hansum6@gmail.com.
Utsav D PatelMayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
Miguel D Quintero-ConsuegraDepartment of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Maria P Aguilera-PeñaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Humberto J Madriñán-NaviaCenter for Research and Training in Neurosurgery, Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital Universitario de la Samaritana, Bogota, Colombia.
Aulia W PutraDepartment of Medicine, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Julius JulyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitas Pelita Harapan, Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia.
Saurabh KatariaDepartment of Neurology, Louisiana State University Health Science Center at Shreveport, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · USPelita Harapan University · IDHospital Universitario de la Samaritana · COLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USUniversitas Trisakti · ID

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe blood-brain barrier can prevent circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) derived from the central nervous system from entering the blood making it challenging to evaluate molecular features of leptomeningeal metastasis (LM). Accordingly, we sought to systematically compare the diagnostic power or significance of ctDNA derived from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) compared to plasma ctDNA in patients with LM.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed under the PRISMA guideline. We used PubMed, EMBASE, and the EuroPMC to search the literature using combinations of the following terms: circulating tumor DNA, ctDNA, circulating tumor cell, brain metastasis, leptomeningeal metastasis, outcome(s), and prognosis. We included all available English language studies that compared the diagnostic significance of CSF derived and serum ctDNA. All eligible studies level of bias was assessed using the New Castle Ottawa Scale (NOS).

resultsOur meta-analysis from 6 included studies (n = 226) that confirmed the diagnostic power of liquid biopsies in detecting genomic alteration is better when taking a CSF-derived samples than from the plasma (RR 1.46 [0.93; 2.29]; I

conclusionCSF ctDNA is better at describing molecular landscape for LM; such an understanding may ultimately help inform patient treatment and responses to therapy.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNAMeningeal CarcinomatosisNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingBiomarkers, TumorCentral Nervous SystemHumansLiquid BiopsyMutationBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNACerebrospinal fluidCirculating Tumor DNALeptomeningeal metastasesLiquid biopsy

Identifiers

PMID38019327
OpenAlexW4389141699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.