ArticleOncology letters2017
Circulating tumor cell detection: A direct comparison between negative and unbiased enrichment in lung cancer.
Article in Oncology letters, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating tumor cells as biomarkers in melanoma: techniques, challenges, and clinical applications.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Clinical significance of genomic sequencing of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in cancer.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2024Review
- Label-free tumor cells classification using deep learning and high-content imaging.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Review
- Review
- The Role of Liquid Biopsy in Early Diagnosis of Lung Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Future directions and management of liquid biopsy in non-small cell lung cancer.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2020Review
- The Prognostic Value of Circulating Tumor Cells in Asian Neuroendocrine Tumors.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Liquid biopsy for lung cancer early detection.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs), isolated as a 'liquid biopsy', may provide important diagnostic and prognostic information. Therefore, rapid, reliable and unbiased detection of CTCs are required for routine clinical analyses. It was demonstrated that negative enrichment, an epithelial marker-independent technique for isolating CTCs, exhibits a better efficiency in the detection of CTCs compared with positive enrichment techniques that only use specific anti-epithelial cell adhesion molecules. However, negative enrichment techniques incur significant cell loss during the isolation procedure, and as it is a method that uses only one type of antibody, it is inherently biased. The detection procedure and identification of cell types also relies on skilled and experienced technicians. In the present study, the detection sensitivity of using negative enrichment and a previously described unbiased detection method was compared. The results revealed that unbiased detection methods may efficiently detect >90% of cancer cells in blood samples containing CTCs. By contrast, only 40-60% of CTCs were detected by negative enrichment. Additionally, CTCs were identified in >65% of patients with stage I/II lung cancer. This simple yet efficient approach may achieve a high level of sensitivity. It demonstrates a potential for the large-scale clinical implementation of CTC-based diagnostic and prognostic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.