Comparing Two Methods for Detecting Cancer Cells in Blood
Author Information
Author(s): Farace F, Massard C, Vimond N, Drusch F, Jacques N, Billiot F, Laplanche A, Chauchereau A, Lacroix L, Planchard D, Le Moulec S, André F, Fizazi K, Soria J C, Vielh P
Primary Institution: Institut de Cancérologie Gustave Roussy
Hypothesis
How do the CellSearch and ISET methods compare in detecting circulating tumor cells in patients with metastatic carcinomas?
Conclusion
The study found significant discrepancies in circulating tumor cell counts between the two detection methods, which vary by tumor type.
Supporting Evidence
- Concordant results were obtained in 55% of breast cancer patients.
- 60% of prostate cancer patients had concordant results.
- Only 20% of lung cancer patients had concordant results.
- 30% of patients were negative according to CellSearch while only 5% were negative using ISET.
- CTC counts were generally higher using CellSearch than by ISET in breast cancer patients.
Takeaway
This study looked at two ways to find cancer cells in the blood of patients. It found that one method often missed cells that the other could find, especially in lung cancer patients.
Methodology
The study compared the CellSearch and ISET methods for detecting circulating tumor cells in blood samples from patients with metastatic breast, prostate, and lung cancers.
Potential Biases
Potential underestimation of CTC counts by ISET due to loss of cells during the detection process.
Limitations
The study did not assess the clinical relevance of the two methods and was limited to a small sample size.
Participant Demographics
Patients included 20 with breast cancer, 20 with prostate cancer, and 20 with lung cancer.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.04
Statistical Significance
p=0.04
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website