PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 15, 2026Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention2 citations

Clinical validity of circulating tumor DNA as a diagnostic biomarker for prostate cancer: a systematic review

View Full Paper
MVMaxime De VriezeGerman Cancer Research CenterNZNan ZhangGerman Cancer Research CenterPSPetra SeiboldGerman Cancer Research Center

Key Points

  • This review aims to evaluate the clinical validity of circulating tumor DNA as a diagnostic biomarker for prostate cancer.
  • Performed systematic review following PRISMA guidelines.
  • Identified original peer-reviewed articles published before August 2025.
  • Included studies comparing blood-derived cfDNA biomarkers in men with and without prostate cancer.
  • Analyzed performance of qualitative cfDNA assays, including PCR and next generation sequencing.
  • Fifty-nine articles were identified and analyzed.
  • Circulating tumor DNA showed improved diagnostic test performance for aggressive and metastatic prostate cancer.
  • GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation had an average sensitivity of 35.1% and specificity of 91.2% for localized prostate cancer.

Abstract

Abstract Current diagnostic pathways for prostate cancer (PCa) have unsatisfactory specificity and rely heavily on magnetic resonance imaging, underscoring the need for novel diagnostic biomarkers. This article provides a systematic review of the evidence on using blood-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based biomarkers for PCa diagnosis. A structured review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Original peer-reviewed research articles published before August 2025 were identified from PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Embase using keyword combinations concerning PCa, cfDNA, and diagnostic test performance. Studies that compared blood-derived cfDNA-based diagnostic biomarkers in men with and without PCa were included. Fifty-nine articles were identified and analyzed. Most articles reported qualitative cfDNA assays relying on PCR (N=37) or next generation sequencing (NGS; N=10). Diagnostic test performance improved for aggressive and metastatic PCa. However, evidence regarding clinical validity in localized disease is scarce, particularly for NGS-based methods (3 studies). GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation, the most frequently investigated biomarker, showed an average sensitivity and specificity of 35.1% and 91.2%, respectively, for the detection of localized PCa. Overall, circulating tumor DNA represents a promising diagnostic biomarker for PCa early detection. High-quality discovery and validation research in the intended-use setting are essential to fully understand clinical validity and utility.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Vrieze et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69b6068883145bc643d1c802https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-25-1820
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper