Systematic review and meta-analysis of accuracy of tumor origin detection in blood cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) assays in the general population.

Authors

null

Joo Hee Park

Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

Joo Hee Park , Youjin Oh , Liam Il-Young Chung , Richard Duan , Trie Arni Djunadi , Sung Mi Yoon , Zunairah Shah , Chan Mi Jung , Ilene Hong , Leeseul Kim , Horyun Choi , Young Kwang Chae

Organizations

Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, Louis A Weiss Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, Ascension Saint Francis Hospital, Evanston, IL, University of Hawaii Internal Medicine Residency Program, Honolulu, HI

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Among recently developed blood-based MCED tests, the ability to determine the location of tumors is pivotal to guiding appropriate treatment. We systematically reviewed and statistically examined the accuracy of tumor of origin predictions among blood-based MCED tests. Methods: Original articles were searched from Pubmed, Cochrane, and Embase for blood-based screening tests, multiple cancer types, and asymptomatic human subjects. We excluded studies with small samples (n < 30), non-screening, and non-blood-based tests. For cfDNA-based assays, measurements of diagnostic accuracy were pooled for meta-analysis. Results: Of 1,074 records identified and screened, five case-control studies and one cohort study that used cfDNA-based diagnostic tests were analyzed. Accuracy of tissue-of-origin (TOO) prediction for 3,895 cancer samples across cancer types was 0.79 (95% CI 0.66 - 0.90). Among six cancer types, colorectal cancers had the highest accuracy and liver & bile duct cancers had the lowest, although the difference was statistically insignificant (0.89 (95% CI 0.79-0.97) vs. 0.68 (95% CI 0.40-0.90)). Additionally, cases were most frequently misclassified as colorectal cancer (Table 1). The information for localizing TOO was derived from methylation patterns of cfDNA in four studies, fragmentation profiles of cfDNA in another study, and combination of mutations in cfDNA and protein markers in the last study. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that the primary site of cancers was accurately discerned in 79% of cases by MCED tests. However, performance varies across cancer types. Further research on performance based on cancer stages and in combination with other molecular profiling is warranted.

Pooled accuracy of prediction of tissue-of-origin (TOO) and frequently ‘misclassified as’ cancer types.

Events/TotalAccuracy of prediction Misclassification
TypeFrequency
Total 3,229/3,8950.79
Colorectal656/7430.90Upper GI26/573
Breast 9/573
Breast461/5570.88Colorectal 20/349
Pancreas & GB4/349
Lung 4/349
Ovarian 136/1640.85Colorectal16/147
Uterus 13/147
Pancreatic & GB289/3380.82Colorectal12/317
Upper GI10/317
Upper GI226/3130.75Colorectal39/261
Lung 10/261
Lung553/6810.76Colorectal29/585
Head and neck 8/585
Liver & Bile duct 95/1440.68 Colorectal13/220
Pancreas & GB 8/220

Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; GB = gallbladder, Upper GI = stomach and esophagus.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Publication Only: Developmental Therapeutics—Molecularly Targeted Agents and Tumor Biology

Track

Developmental Therapeutics—Molecularly Targeted Agents and Tumor Biology

Sub Track

Molecular Diagnostics and Imaging

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 16; abstr e15053)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.e15053

Abstract #

e15053

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

PD-L1 as a predictor of chemo-immunotherapy response in biliary tract cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

First Author: Juan Jose Juarez

First Author: Ali Alqahtani

First Author: Ahsan Ayaz