ArticleJournal of neuroendocrinology2025
NETest® 2.0-A decade of innovation in neuroendocrine tumor diagnostics.
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.
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.
A Registry for Neuroendocrine Tumors
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Value of a 51-Neuroendocrine Tumor-Specific Gene Signature (NETest 2.0) for Management of Pancreatic and Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Prospective Study in a Consecutive Cohort of 82 Patients Considered for Surgery.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Extracellular vesicles isolated from frozen whole blood show biomarker potential in small intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms.iScience · 2026Article
- NETest2.0Cancers · 2026Article
- Analytical Validation of NETest2.0Cancers · 2026Article
- Clinical Validity of NETest2.0Cancers · 2026Article
- Circulating Tumor DNA Monitoring in Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy-Treated Patients With Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.JCO precision oncology · 2026Article
- Gluteal hemangioma mimicking a neuroendocrine tumor: pitfalls in neuroendocrine tumor diagnostic testing.JCEM case reports · 2026Article
- Discordance of Dual-Tracer PET/CT with Histopathology in a Grade I Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: A Diagnostic Conundrum.World journal of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- The Evolving Landscape of GEP-NENs in the Era of Precision Oncology: Molecular Insights into Tumor Heterogeneity.Cancers · 2025Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Prognosis of Gastro-Entero-Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.Cancers · 2025Review
- NETest® 2.0-A decade of innovation in neuroendocrine tumor diagnostics.Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.