循环无细胞DNA甲基化作为肺癌检测的生物标志物:诊断研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Diana Inês Machado, Tiago Brito-Rocha, Sofia Salta, Teresa Monjardino, Rui Henrique, Carmen Jerónimo
{"title":"循环无细胞DNA甲基化作为肺癌检测的生物标志物:诊断研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Diana Inês Machado, Tiago Brito-Rocha, Sofia Salta, Teresa Monjardino, Rui Henrique, Carmen Jerónimo","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02860-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Lung cancer (LC) is the most incident malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related fatalities. The lack of dissemination of effective screening tools hinders early detection, resulting in late-stage diagnosis, mostly associated with high mortality. Gene-specific methylation alterations detected in plasma or serum circulation cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) have been investigated as a possible screening tool. Thus, the main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically assess published data on the use of ccfDNA methylation-based biomarkers for detection of LC. PubMed, including MEDLINE and Scopus databases, were systematically searched for eligible articles evaluating the diagnostic performance of ccfDNA methylation alterations in that setting. A bivariate random-effect model was employed to calculate pool estimated sensitivity and specificity. Accuracy subgroup analyses, according to histological subtype, stage, and smoker status were carried out. A total of 1961 articles were retrieved, of which 44 met inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis generated a pooled sensitivity of 54% (CI 95% 48-60%) and a pooled specificity of 86% (CI 95% 83-87%) for LC detection. The most frequently tested host-genome methylation markers were RASSF1 A, APC, SHOX2, SOX17, and HOXA9. Overall, methylation analysis of ccfDNA detects LC with high specificity but modest sensitivity. Further research is required to improve diagnostic performance, establish methodological standards and determine whether this might complement existing screening strategies to increase effectiveness. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42023408964.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"120"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12128315/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Circulating cell-free DNA methylation as biomarker for lung cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies.\",\"authors\":\"Diana Inês Machado, Tiago Brito-Rocha, Sofia Salta, Teresa Monjardino, Rui Henrique, Carmen Jerónimo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-025-02860-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Lung cancer (LC) is the most incident malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related fatalities. The lack of dissemination of effective screening tools hinders early detection, resulting in late-stage diagnosis, mostly associated with high mortality. Gene-specific methylation alterations detected in plasma or serum circulation cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) have been investigated as a possible screening tool. Thus, the main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically assess published data on the use of ccfDNA methylation-based biomarkers for detection of LC. PubMed, including MEDLINE and Scopus databases, were systematically searched for eligible articles evaluating the diagnostic performance of ccfDNA methylation alterations in that setting. A bivariate random-effect model was employed to calculate pool estimated sensitivity and specificity. Accuracy subgroup analyses, according to histological subtype, stage, and smoker status were carried out. A total of 1961 articles were retrieved, of which 44 met inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis generated a pooled sensitivity of 54% (CI 95% 48-60%) and a pooled specificity of 86% (CI 95% 83-87%) for LC detection. The most frequently tested host-genome methylation markers were RASSF1 A, APC, SHOX2, SOX17, and HOXA9. Overall, methylation analysis of ccfDNA detects LC with high specificity but modest sensitivity. Further research is required to improve diagnostic performance, establish methodological standards and determine whether this might complement existing screening strategies to increase effectiveness. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42023408964.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"120\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12128315/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02860-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02860-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肺癌(LC)是最常见的恶性肿瘤,也是癌症相关死亡的主要原因。缺乏有效筛查工具的传播阻碍了早期发现,导致晚期诊断,大多与高死亡率有关。在血浆或血清循环无细胞DNA (ccfDNA)中检测到的基因特异性甲基化改变已被研究作为一种可能的筛选工具。因此,本系统综述和荟萃分析的主要目的是严格评估关于使用基于ccfDNA甲基化的生物标志物检测LC的已发表数据。PubMed,包括MEDLINE和Scopus数据库,系统地检索了在该环境下评估ccfDNA甲基化改变诊断性能的合格文章。采用双变量随机效应模型计算池估计敏感性和特异性。准确度亚组分析,根据组织学亚型,分期和吸烟者状态进行。共检索到1961篇文章,其中44篇符合纳入标准。荟萃分析得出LC检测的总灵敏度为54% (CI 95% 48-60%),总特异性为86% (CI 95% 83-87%)。最常见的宿主基因组甲基化标记是RASSF1 A、APC、SHOX2、SOX17和HOXA9。总体而言,ccfDNA甲基化分析检测LC具有高特异性,但灵敏度适中。需要进一步的研究来提高诊断性能,建立方法标准,并确定这是否可以补充现有的筛查策略以提高有效性。系统评价注册号PROSPERO CRD42023408964。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Circulating cell-free DNA methylation as biomarker for lung cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies.

Lung cancer (LC) is the most incident malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related fatalities. The lack of dissemination of effective screening tools hinders early detection, resulting in late-stage diagnosis, mostly associated with high mortality. Gene-specific methylation alterations detected in plasma or serum circulation cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) have been investigated as a possible screening tool. Thus, the main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to critically assess published data on the use of ccfDNA methylation-based biomarkers for detection of LC. PubMed, including MEDLINE and Scopus databases, were systematically searched for eligible articles evaluating the diagnostic performance of ccfDNA methylation alterations in that setting. A bivariate random-effect model was employed to calculate pool estimated sensitivity and specificity. Accuracy subgroup analyses, according to histological subtype, stage, and smoker status were carried out. A total of 1961 articles were retrieved, of which 44 met inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis generated a pooled sensitivity of 54% (CI 95% 48-60%) and a pooled specificity of 86% (CI 95% 83-87%) for LC detection. The most frequently tested host-genome methylation markers were RASSF1 A, APC, SHOX2, SOX17, and HOXA9. Overall, methylation analysis of ccfDNA detects LC with high specificity but modest sensitivity. Further research is required to improve diagnostic performance, establish methodological standards and determine whether this might complement existing screening strategies to increase effectiveness. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42023408964.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信