SynthesisOncology reviews2026
Clinical value of combined
Synthesis in Oncology reviews, 2026. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with poor prognosis in advanced stage diseases. Although early diagnosis has the potential to improve patient outcomes, current diagnostic methods remain suboptimal, highlighting the need for accurate molecular biomarkers. We systematically reviewed 49 studies to evaluate the diagnostic performance of SHOX2 methylation, RASSF1A methylation, and their combined panel for lung cancer detection. The combined SHOX2/RASSF1A methylation panel demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 77.8% (95% CI: 72.3%-82.5%) and specificity of 89.0% (95% CI: 86.6%-91.1%), with an HSROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.916. SHOX2 methylation alone yielded a sensitivity of 69.4% and specificity of 91.7%, whereas RASSF1A methylation showed lower sensitivity (45.7%) but the highest specificity (93.8%). Pairwise comparisons demonstrated that the combined panel significantly improved sensitivity compared with either SHOX2 or RASSF1A alone while maintaining specificity comparable to SHOX2, although lower than that of RASSF1A. Subgroup analyses showed that assay method and pathological subtype contributed to differences in pooled sensitivity, whereas leave-one-out sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the pooled estimates. In conclusion, the combined SHOX2/RASSF1A methylation panel provides a more balanced diagnostic performance than either biomarker alone and represents a promising adjunctive approach for lung cancer detection. Future studies should focus on standardizing detection methods, integrating these biomarkers with other diagnostic modalities, and evaluating their diagnostic performance in early-stage lung cancer to further enhance their clinical utility.
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.