Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39945192›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroendocrinology2025

NETest® 2.0-A decade of innovation in neuroendocrine tumor diagnostics.

M Kidd, I A Drozdov, A Chirindel, G Nicolas, D Imagawa, A Gulati, T Tsuchikawa, V Prasad, A B Halim, J Strosberg

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroendocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02270567 (A Registry for Neuroendocrine Tumors), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02270567 enrolling by invitationnot on this map

A Registry for Neuroendocrine Tumors

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorWren Laboratories LLCRan2015 to 2030Enrolled400ConditionsNeuroendocrine Tumor, Carcinoid, Neuroendocrine CarcinomaArmsNETest
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. NETest2.0Cancers · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

10 authors.

M KiddWren Laboratories, Branford, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1525-5167
I A DrozdovBering Research, London, UK.
A ChirindelUniversity of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
G NicolasUniversity of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
D ImagawaUniversity of California-Irvine, Orange, California, USA.
A GulatiBennett Cancer Center, Stamford, Connecticut, USA.
T TsuchikawaHokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
V PrasadMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
A B HalimWren Laboratories, Branford, Connecticut, USA.
J StrosbergMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8405-218X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are challenging to diagnose and manage. Because there is a critical need for a reliable biomarker, we previously developed the NETest, a liquid biopsy test that quantifies the expression of 51 neuroendocrine tumor (NET)-specific genes in blood using real-time PCR (NETest 1.0). In this study, we have leveraged our well-established laboratory approach (blood collection, RNA isolation, qPCR) with contemporary supervised machine learning methods and expanded training and testing sets to improve the discrimination and calibration of the NETest algorithm (NETest 2.0). qPCR measurements of RNA-stabilized blood-derived gene expression of 51 NET markers were used to train two supervised classifiers. The first classifier trained on 78 Controls and 162 NETs, distinguishing NETs from controls; the second, trained on 134 stable disease samples, 61 progressive disease samples, differentiated stable from progressive NET disease. In all cases, 80% of data was retained for model training, while remaining 20% were used for performance evaluation. The predictive performance of the AI system was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, and Area under Received Operating Characteristic curves (AUROC). The algorithm with the highest performance was retained for validation in two independent validation sets. Validation Cohort #I consisted of 277 patients and 186 healthy controls from the United States, Latin America, Europe, Africa and Asia, while Validation Cohort #II comprised 291 European patients from the Swiss NET Registry. A specificity cohort of 147 gastrointestinal, pancreatic and lung malignancies (non-NETs) was also evaluated. NETest 2.0 Algorithm #1 (Random Forest/gene expression normalized to ATG4B) achieved an AUROC of 0.91 for distinguishing NETs from controls (Validation Cohort #I), with a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 81%. In Validation Cohort #II, 92% of NETs with image-positive disease were detected. The AUROC for differentiating NETs from other malignancies was 0.95; the sensitivity was 92% and specificity 90%. NETest 2.0 Algorithm #2 (Random Forest/gene expression normalized to ALG9) demonstrated an AUROC of 0.81 in Validation Cohort #I and 0.82 in Validation Cohort #II for differentiating stable from progressive disease, with specificities of 81% and 82%, respectively. Model performance was not affected by gender, ethnicity or age. Substantial improvements in performance for both algorithms were identified in head-to-head comparisons with NETest 1.0 (diagnostic: p = 1.73 × 10

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorIntestinal NeoplasmsNeuroendocrine TumorsPancreatic NeoplasmsStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansLiquid BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkers, Tumorbiomarkerdiagnostic accuracyNETestneuroendocrine tumorqPCR

Identifiers

PMID39945192
PMCPMC11975799

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.