Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 Feb 25:4:4168.
doi: 10.1038/srep04168.

High-resolution melting analysis for accurate detection of BRAF mutations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dong Chen  1 , Yan-Yan Wang  2 , Zheng-Ran Chuai  1 , Jun-Fu Huang  1 , Yun-Xia Wang  1 , Kai Liu  3 , Li-Qun Zhang  1 , Zhao Yang  1 , Da-Chuan Shi  1 , Qian Liu  1 , Qing Huang  1 , Wei-Ling Fu  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

High-resolution melting analysis for accurate detection of BRAF mutations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dong Chen et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

The high-resolution melting curve analysis (HRMA) might be a good alternative method for rapid detection of BRAF mutations. However, the accuracy of HRMA in detection of BRAF mutations has not been systematically evaluated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis involving 1324 samples from 14 separate studies. The overall sensitivity of HRMA was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-0.82), and the overall specificity was very high at 0.99 (95% CI = 0.94-0.98). The values for the pooled positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 68.01 (95% CI = 25.33-182.64), 0.06 (95% CI = 0.03-0.11), and 1263.76 (95% CI = 393.91-4064.39), respectively. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve for the same data shows an area of 1.00 and a Q* value of 0.97. The high sensitivity and specificity, simplicity, low cost, less labor or time and rapid turnaround make HRMA a good alternative method for rapid detection of BRAF mutations in the clinical practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. A flow chart highlighting study selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Forest plots estimates of sensitivity (a) and specificity (b) for high-resolution melting curve analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Figure 3
Figure 3. Forest plots estimates of positive likelihood ratio (PLR) (a) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) (b) for high-resolution melting curve analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Figure 4
Figure 4. Forest plots estimates of diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (a) and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves (b) for high-resolution melting curve analysis.
Figure 5
Figure 5. Deek's Funnel Plot Asymmetry Test for the assessment of potential publication bias.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Pao W. & Girard N. New driver mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer. Lancet Oncol. 12, 175–180 (2011). - PubMed
    1. Yaeger R. & Saltz L. BRAF mutations in colorectal cancer: clinical relevance and role in targeted therapy. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 10, 1456–1458 (2012). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sclafani F., Gullo G., Sheahan K. & Crown J. BRAF mutations in melanoma and colorectal cancer: A single oncogenic mutation with different tumour phenotypes and clinical implications. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 87, 55–68 (2013). - PubMed
    1. Tol J., Nagtegaal I. D. & Punt C. J. BRAF mutation in metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 361, 98–99 (2009). - PubMed
    1. Kumar R. et al. BRAF mutations in metastatic melanoma: a possible association with clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res. 9, 3362–3368 (2003). - PubMed

Publication types

Substances