ReviewThe journal of liquid biopsy2025
Demonstrating the clinical utility of genomic profiling using cerebrospinal fluid to inform management of central nervous system tumors - a meta analysis of the literature.
Review in The journal of liquid biopsy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinician perspectives on the clinical utility of Belay Summit™ 2.0 cerebrospinal fluid test - A mixed methods study.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Meta-analysis of literature was performed to gain an understanding of the performance of genomic profiling assays in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for the diagnosis and management of CNS cancers. Methods: Using PRISMA methodology, PubMed was searched with the following search terms; "CSF and liquid biopsy" and "cerebrospinal fluid, liquid biopsy, mutations." Key data fields such as DNA input, technologies used, biomarkers evaluated, types of CNS tumors, sensitivity and specificity, and performance outcomes were analyzed. Studies were excluded if they did not evaluate cancer, use CSF or molecular test methods, had <10 patients, involved pediatric cases or were review articles. Results: A total of 63 studies were included in the analysis with a majority using ctDNA (n = 38) and targeted NGS panels (n = 45) with both sensitivity and specificity being reported in 24 studies. Of the samples sequenced, 76 % of the primary cancers were gliomas with lung cancer making up 67 % of the metastatic cancers. The Belay Summit™ test performed significantly better in both primary and metastatic CNS cancers with 88 % and 95 % sensitivity respectively compared to studies that used NGS with 6 of the 24 demonstrating a median sensitivity of 47 ± 1.95 % for primary and 7 of 24 demonstrating a median sensitivity of 71 ± 0.76 % for metastatic cancers. Conclusions: CSF does have potential to inform treatment and management of CNS tumors. For a CSF based molecular test to be highly sensitive and specific, key considerations include panel content, methodology used, the type of variants being evaluated and the inclusion of true negative controls.
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.