Óscar Rapado-González1,2,3, Cristina Martínez-Reglero4, Ángel Salgado-Barreira4, Bahi Takkouche5,6, Rafael López-López3,7, María Mercedes Suárez-Cunqueiro1,3,8, Laura Muinelo-Romay2,3. 1. Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, Medicine and Dentistry School, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 2. Liquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 3. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain. 4. Methodology and Statistics Unit, Galicia Sur Health Research Institute (IISGS), Vigo, Spain. 5. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 6. Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública-CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 7. Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Foundation Institute of Santiago (IDIS,), Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 8. Oral Sciences Research Group, Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Abstract
Background: Saliva represents a promising non-invasive source of novel biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis cancer. This meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of salivary biomarkers for detection of malignant non-oral tumours to better define the value of saliva as an alternative liquid biopsy.Materials and methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, LILACS and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify articles that examined the potential of salivary biomarkers for the diagnosis of malignant non-oral tumours. To assess the overall accuracy, we calculated the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) using a random- or fixed-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One hundred fifty-five study units from 29 articles with 11,153 subjects were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC were 0.76 (95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.74-0.77), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.75-0.77), 3.22 (95% CI, 2.92-3.55), 0.31 (95% CI, 0.28-0.34), 13.42 (95% CI, 12.28-15.96) and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.84-0.87), respectively. Conclusion: Salivary biomarkers may be potentially used for non-invasive diagnosis of malignant non-oral tumours.Key messagesThis meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of salivary biomarkers for detection of malignant non-oral tumours to better define the role of saliva as an alternative liquid biopsy.Salivary biomarkers showed 85% accuracy for cancer distant to the oral cavity.Saliva represents a promising non-invasive source of novel biomarkers in cancer.
Background: Saliva represents a promising non-invasive source of novel biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis cancer. This meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of salivary biomarkers for detection of malignant non-oral tumours to better define the value of saliva as an alternative liquid biopsy.Materials and methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, LILACS and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify articles that examined the potential of salivary biomarkers for the diagnosis of malignant non-oral tumours. To assess the overall accuracy, we calculated the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) using a random- or fixed-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One hundred fifty-five study units from 29 articles with 11,153 subjects were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC were 0.76 (95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.74-0.77), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.75-0.77), 3.22 (95% CI, 2.92-3.55), 0.31 (95% CI, 0.28-0.34), 13.42 (95% CI, 12.28-15.96) and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.84-0.87), respectively. Conclusion: Salivary biomarkers may be potentially used for non-invasive diagnosis of malignant non-oral tumours.Key messagesThis meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic value of salivary biomarkers for detection of malignant non-oral tumours to better define the role of saliva as an alternative liquid biopsy.Salivary biomarkers showed 85% accuracy for cancer distant to the oral cavity.Saliva represents a promising non-invasive source of novel biomarkers in cancer.
Authors: Andrea Cruz; Maria Vieira; Ana R Mesquita; Adriana Sampaio; Inês Mendes-Pinto; Isabel Soares; Paulo P Freitas Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 5.152