ArticleIranian biomedical journal2025
Liquid Biopsy for EGFR Mutation Detection in NSCLC: Evaluation of Plasma ctDNA and Comparison with Plasma exoDNA.
Article in Iranian biomedical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate detection of actionable epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR) mutations is essential for guiding targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Liquid biopsy approaches using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and exosomal DNA (exoDNA) offer noninvasive alternatives for molecular profiling. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of nested PCR combined with sanger sequencing for detecting common EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletions and the L858R point mutation) in plasma samples from Iranian NSCLC patients. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, blood samples were collected from 30 NSCLC patients with confirmed EGFR mutations. ctDNA was extracted from plasma and analyzed using nested PCR followed by sanger sequencing. Specificity was assessed in 20 EGFR–wild type NSCLC patients serving as controls. Diagnostic performance was further evaluated in relation to clinicopathological factors. Results: EGFR mutations were detected in plasma ctDNA in 63.3% of patients. Detection sensitivity was significantly associated with tumor stage but was independent of mutation subtype, age, sex, or smoking status. The assay showed high specificity, with no false positive results in control samples (95% CI: 83.9–100.0%). Although exoDNA analysis demonstrated a higher sensitivity than ctDNA (76.6% vs. 63.3%), this difference was not statistically significant. Notably, combined analysis of ctDNA and exoDNA increased overall detection sensitivity to 80%. Conclusions: Nested PCR with sanger sequencing represents a reliable rule in strategy for EGFR mutation detection in plasma. Integrating ctDNA and exoDNA analyses substantially improves sensitivity and may enhance noninvasive molecular diagnostics in NSCLC.
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.