ArticleBMC cancer2025
Diagnostic performance of EBV DNA load testing for nasopharyngeal carcinoma in nasopharyngeal swab outperforms the approach in other specimens.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epstein-Barr virus based biomarkers and targeted therapies in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a narrative review.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Review
- Extranodal nasal-orbital communicating lesions NK/T cell lymphoma with ocular symptoms as the initial manifestation misdiagnosed as sinusitis and orbital cellulitis: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Epstein-Barr Virus Load in the Saliva of Patients with Oropharyngeal Cancer-Could It Have Prognostic Significance?Viruses · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe DNA load of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) can be detected in different types of specimens, however, the diagnostic performance across specimens hasn't been systematically compared in an independent study. We compared their diagnostic performances within nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), plasma, and saliva head by head in the same population in the endemic region.
methodsWe recruited 150 newly diagnosed NPC patients and 150 non-NPC controls from two cancer centers during the 2020-2021 years in southern China. EBV DNA loads in NPS, plasma, and saliva were tested by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Meanwhile, two EBV serology antibodies of VCA-lgA and EBNA1-lgA were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Sensitivity and specificity were compared among the EBV DNA loads across specimens, as well as with the traditional screening marker of EBV antibody score. Finally, the diagnostic performances for NPC with the combinations of the EBV DNA load and the antibody score were evaluated.
resultsEBV DNA loads in the NPS and plasma were higher in cases, and we further evaluated the diagnostic performances for NPC. EBV DNA load in saliva had no difference in cases and controls, P = 0.84. EBV DNA load in NPS showed a sensitivity of 92.00% (95% CI: 86.44%-95.80%) and specificity of 98.67% (95% CI: 95.27%-99.84%) for NPC. Compared with EBV DNA load in NPS, the approach in plasma exhibited a lower sensitivity of 85.33% (95% CI: 78.64%-90.57%, P < 0.01) and the same specificity of 98.67% (95% CI: 95.27%-99.84%, P = 0.66). EBV antibody score demonstrated a sensitivity of 94.67% (95% CI: 89.76%-97.67%) and a specificity of 90.00% (95% CI: 84.04%-94.29%). The combination of the EBV DNA load in NPS with EBV antibody score improved the specificity to 99.33%, while maintaining the sensitivity of 88.67%.
conclusionWe demonstrated that EBV DNA load in NPS could better discriminate NPC patients from controls than the approach in plasma. EBV DNA load in saliva had no value for NPC diagnosis. The combination of EBV DNA load in NPS with EBV antibody could further improve the specificity, while maintaining a rather good sensitivity for NPC diagnosis.
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.