Liquid biopsy in Oncology: Results of a Delphi consensus study endorsed by the AIOM-SIAPEC/IAP-SIBioC-SIF Italian scientific societies

Liquid biopsy (LB) offers a minimally invasive alternative to tissue biopsy by detecting tumor-derived analytes in biological fluids. Nonetheless, its adoption is limited by variability in methodologies. Therefore, this study used a modified RAND/UCLA approach involving 23 experts of the field, providing two questionnaires that assessed agreement on 22 items. Consensus was reached for all the pre- and post-analytical phase items, agreeing on the pivotal role of plasma cfDNA. Conversely, opinions varied regarding other biomarkers and biological samples. Furthermore, turnaround time and disease setting resulted as two of the most important analytical parameters for choosing testing methodology. Particularly, a complementary tissue-liquid approach with sampling interval ≤2 weeks was preferred. To conclude, a strong consensus on sample handling, biomarker prioritization, and clinical applications is achieved. However, significant heterogeneity remains regarding novel biomarkers, sampling strategies, and costs. Standardization and validation are needed to enhance the clinical adoption of LB.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Liquid Biopsy
Published
2025-12-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlb.2025.100453
Primary Topic
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Liquid biopsy in Oncology: Results of a Delphi consensus study endorsed by the AIOM-SIAPEC/IAP-SIBioC-SIF Italian scientific societies

Andrea Bianchi, Massimo Di Maïo, Tancredi Didier Bazan Russo, Rossana Berardi et al.
The Journal of Liquid Biopsy
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
article

Liquid biopsy in Oncology: Results of a Delphi consensus study endorsed by the AIOM-SIAPEC/IAP-SIBioC-SIF Italian scientific societies

Andrea Bianchi, Massimo Di Maïo, Tancredi Didier Bazan Russo, Rossana Berardi, Valerio Gristina, Stefania Gori, Marzia Del Re, Giuseppe Giuffrè, Matteo Fassan, Lorena Incorvaia, A. Russo, P. Tagliaferri, Romano Danesi, Daniele Santini, Nicola Normanno, Antonio Marchetti, Umberto Malapelle, Giordano Domenico Beretta, Marcello Ciaccio, Antonio Galvano, Christian Rolfo, Ettore Domenico Capoluongo, Giancarlo Troncone, Francesco Perrone, Nicola Silvestris, Carmine Pinto, Giovanni Maria Iannantuono, Gennaro Daniele
article en

Abstract

Liquid biopsy (LB) offers a minimally invasive alternative to tissue biopsy by detecting tumor-derived analytes in biological fluids. Nonetheless, its adoption is limited by variability in methodologies. Therefore, this study used a modified RAND/UCLA approach involving 23 experts of the field, providing two questionnaires that assessed agreement on 22 items. Consensus was reached for all the pre- and post-analytical phase items, agreeing on the pivotal role of plasma cfDNA. Conversely, opinions varied regarding other biomarkers and biological samples. Furthermore, turnaround time and disease setting resulted as two of the most important analytical parameters for choosing testing methodology. Particularly, a complementary tissue-liquid approach with sampling interval ≤2 weeks was preferred. To conclude, a strong consensus on sample handling, biomarker prioritization, and clinical applications is achieved. However, significant heterogeneity remains regarding novel biomarkers, sampling strategies, and costs. Standardization and validation are needed to enhance the clinical adoption of LB.

The Journal of Liquid BiopsyVol. 11
University of Messina (IT), Marche Polytechnic University (IT), University of Padua (IT), University of Milan (IT), Azienda Ospedaliera San Giovanni Addolorata (IT), The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (US), Policlinico Umberto I (IT), Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT), Magna Graecia University (IT), University of Chieti-Pescara (IT), Azienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino (IT), Azienda Sanitaria Unità Locale di Reggio Emilia (IT), Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda (IT), Saint Camillus International University of Health and Medical Sciences (IT), Fondazione Ricerca Molinette (IT), Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IT), Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria (IT), Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IT), Federico II University Hospital (IT), Istituto Tumori Bari (IT), Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" (IT), Azienda USL di Pescara (IT), Ospedale SS. Annunziata (IT), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Sapienza University of Rome (IT), University of Palermo (IT)
Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica, Università degli Studi di Palermo
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.