IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0155495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Circulating Cell Free DNA as the Diagnostic Marker for Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Quan Zhou
  • Wei Li
  • Bingjie Leng
  • Wenfei Zheng
  • Ze He
  • Manzhen Zuo
  • Aihua Chen

Abstract

Background: Quantitative analyses of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are potential methods for the detection of ovarian cancer. Many studies have evaluated these approaches, but the results were too inconsistent to be conclusive. This study is the first to systematically evaluate the accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer by conducting meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases systematically for relevant literatures up to December 10, 2015. All analyses were conducted using Meta-DiSc1.4 and Stata 12.0 software. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer were pooled. Meta-regression was performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity. Results: This meta-analysis included a total of 9 studies, including 462 ovarian cancer patients and 407 controls. The summary estimates for quantitative analysis of circulating cfDNA in ovarian cancer screen were as follows: sensitivity, 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65–0.74); specificity, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87–0.93); positive likelihood ratio, 6.60 (95% CI, 3.90–11.17); negative likelihood ratio, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.25–0.47); diagnostic odds ratio, 26.05 (95% CI, 14.67–46.26); and area under the curve, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83–0.95), respectively. There was no statistical significance for the evaluation of publication bias. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that quantitative analysis of cfDNA has unsatisfactory sensitivity but acceptable specificity for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to validate the potential applicability of using circulating cfDNA alone or in combination with conventional markers as diagnostic biomarker for ovarian cancer and explore potential factors that may influence the accuracy of ovarian cancer diagnosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Quan Zhou & Wei Li & Bingjie Leng & Wenfei Zheng & Ze He & Manzhen Zuo & Aihua Chen, 2016. "Circulating Cell Free DNA as the Diagnostic Marker for Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155495
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155495
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155495&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0155495?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.