ArticleDiagnostic pathology2025
Evaluating sensitivity of NGS-based mutation detection across diverse sample types in prostate cancer.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Towards implementation of precision medicine biomarkers in early detection and prognostication of prostate cancer.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common malignancies affecting men, with primary treatments involving surgery, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy. The introduction of precision medicine and next-generation sequencing (NGS) has profoundly influenced the clinical management of PCa, particularly by enabling the assessment of genetic alterations that guide treatment decisions. Liquid biopsy using diverse sample types, including plasma, urine, and semen, offers non-invasive alternatives to tissue biopsies. This study sought to compare the performance of NGS-based mutation detection across various sample types in PCa patients.
methodsThirty-seven PCa patients, diagnosed with intermediate to advanced stages (II-IV), were enrolled. All collected samples, including tissues (n = 34), plasma (n = 37), urine (n = 32), and seminal fluids (n = 9), underwent targeted NGS of 437 cancer-related genes. The detection sensitivity, mutational landscape, and maximum variant allele frequencies (MVAFs) were compared across different sample types.
resultsTissue samples, serving as the gold standard, achieved a 100% mutation detection rate. Plasma and urine samples demonstrated high detection sensitivities, reaching 67.6% and 65.6%, respectively, while semen samples showed a lower detection rate of 33.3%. Mutations in FOXA1, SPOP, and TP53 were commonly detected across most sample types with comparable prevalence. AR mutations were observed with similar frequencies in plasma and semen samples, but were absent in tissue and urine samples. The average MVAFs were at similar levels among tissue, plasma, urine, and semen, although urine sediment samples exhibited the lowest MVAFs. Advanced disease stages correlated with increased circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection in both plasma and urine samples. No significant survival advantage associated with ctDNA negativity was observed, likely due to the small sample size.
conclusionsThis study validates the utility of urine and plasma samples as non-invasive and sensitive liquid biopsy options for PCa, showing comparable ctDNA detection rates. Seminal fluid samples also demonstrate potential, despite current sampling challenges. These findings offer insights into the advantages of different sampling methods for PCa detection and reinforce the clinical utility of liquid biopsies in PCa management.
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.