Skip to main content
. 2021 May 28;13(11):2652. doi: 10.3390/cancers13112652

Table 1.

Advantages and disadvantages of standard tissue biopsy versus blood liquid biopsy versus urine liquid biopsy.

Standard Tissue Biopsy Blood Liquid Biopsy Urine Liquid Biopsy
Components Cell structure, grade, stromal and immune cells, Lymphovascular invasion, DNA seq, RNA seq, gene signatures CTCs, cell free nucleic acids, exosomes, tumor educated platelets Cell free DNA, urinary mRNA, miRNA, lnc RNA, other snc RNA, exosomes
Advantages
  • Standard of care

  • Standard technique, low FNR

  • Histological information and immunohistochemical profiling excellent

  • Minimally invasive procedure

  • Early detection and molecular profile assessment

  • Intratumor heterogeneity

  • Real time monitoring of cancer evolution

  • Corelates with tumor burden

  • Identifies genetic markers of treatment and treatment resistance

  • DNA fresh and not modified by storage technique

  • Quick turnaround testing time for ctDNA

  • ctDNA more beneficial in metastatic setting

  • Noninvasive procedure

  • Early detection and molecular profile assessment

  • Intratumor heterogeneity

  • Large quantities available and centrifuged for concentrates

  • High DNA yield

  • Identifies genetic markers of treatment and treatment resistance

  • Good for longitudinal follow up

  • ucfDNA can potentially help in localizing “cancer of unknown primary”

Disadvantages
  • Invasive procedure, involves patient risk

  • Lacks assessment of intratumor heterogeneity

  • Time period of analysis fixed

  • Repetitive invasive biopsies cumbersome

  • Early detection of cancer not possible

  • DNA quality highly variable in FFPE

  • Variable quantity of DNA based on sampling methods, high risk of DNA degradation

  • Investigational setting

  • High FNR

  • Lack of standardized technique for cfDNA and cellular genomic DNA

  • ctDNA quality and extraction methods.

  • Short half life of CTCs (1–2.4 h) in peripheral blood

  • Investigational setting

  • No histological assessment

  • Effect of hydration status and medications

  • ucfDNA integrity sensitivity and specificity issues

  • Artifacts from microchip analysis

  • Variations in assay protocols/sample handling

  • Measurement of urinary RNAs challenging

  • Lack of large multicenter studies

CTC: Circulating tumor cells; FNR: False negative rate; lnc RNA: Long non-coding RNA, sncRNA: small non-coding RNA; ucf DNA: urine cell-free DNA; RT-PCR: Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction; FFPE: Formalin fixed paraffin embedded; ctDNA: circulating tumor DNA.