Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28154374›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2017

Precision diagnostics: moving towards protein biomarker signatures of clinical utility in cancer.

Carl A K Borrebaeck

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 184 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
184citing 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

184 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Data-driven evaluation of suitable immunogens for improved antibody selection.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025
    Article

124 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Carl A K BorrebaeckDepartment of Immunotechnology, CREATE Health Translational Cancer Center, Medicon Village (Bldg 406), Lund University, 223 81 Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in precision diagnostics has been fuelled by the concept that early detection of cancer would benefit patients; that is, if detected early, more tumours should be resectable and treatment more efficacious. Serum contains massive amounts of potentially diagnostic information, and affinity proteomics has risen as an accurate approach to decipher this, to generate actionable information that should result in more precise and evidence-based options to manage cancer. To achieve this, we need to move from single to multiplex biomarkers, a so-called signature, that can provide significantly increased diagnostic accuracy. This Opinion article focuses on the progress being made in identifying protein biomarker signatures of clinical utility, using blood-based proteomics.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorComputational BiologyEarly Detection of CancerGenomicsHumansNeoplasmsProteomicsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID28154374

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.