Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26778171›Full record

ReviewMolecular oncology2016

Non-invasive detection of genome-wide somatic copy number alterations by liquid biopsies.

Ellen Heitzer, Peter Ulz, Jochen B Geigl, Michael R Speicher

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ellen HeitzerMedical University of Graz, Institute of Human Genetics, Harrachgasse 21/8, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Electronic address: ellen.heitzer@medunigraz.at.
Peter UlzMedical University of Graz, Institute of Human Genetics, Harrachgasse 21/8, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Electronic address: peter.ulz@medunigraz.at.
Jochen B GeiglMedical University of Graz, Institute of Human Genetics, Harrachgasse 21/8, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Electronic address: jochen.geigl@medunigraz.at.
Michael R SpeicherMedical University of Graz, Institute of Human Genetics, Harrachgasse 21/8, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Electronic address: michael.speicher@medunigraz.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsies, i.e. the analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) or circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), are evolving into promising clinical tools. Indeed, a plethora of liquid biopsy technologies to deduce non-invasively characteristics of the tumor genome from the peripheral blood have been developed over the last few years. For example, liquid biopsies have been used to assess the tumor burden, to monitor the evolution of tumor genomes, to unravel mechanisms of resistance, to establish the tumor heterogeneity, and for the identification of prognostic and predictive markers. In this review we focus on methods to establish genome-wide profiles of somatic copy number alterations (SCNAs) from plasma DNA and show how they provide novel insights into the biology of cancer and their impact on the management of patients.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiopsyDNA, NeoplasmGene DosageGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenomeHumansNeoplasmsNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingSequence Analysis, DNADNA, NeoplasmCirculating tumor cells (CTCs)Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)Plasma DNASomatic copy number alterationsWhole-genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID26778171
PMCPMC5528970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.