ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Evaluation of circulating cell free DNA in plasma as a biomarker of different thyroid diseases.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Plasma cell-free DNA as predictor of disease status in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer - a prospective study from a tertiary care institution.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- New Perspectives on the Importance of Cell-Free DNA Biology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Evaluation of circulating cell-free nucleic acids in health workers occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Review
- The influence of biological and lifestyle factors on circulating cell-free DNA in blood plasma.eLife · 2021Review
- The Blood Biomarkers of Thyroid Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany studies have been done on proteomics, genomics, epigenetic, immunogenetics in many body fluids. Among these, circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) entered the literature in 1948, but it has not been studied for many years due to technological deficiencies. Following recent advances, geno-metastasis has been mentioned and new research is needed in this area. ccfDNA is known to be an important biomolecule in this regard.
objectiveThe presence of cell-free DNA in the circulatory system may offer a tremendous opportunity to provide novel biomarkers for thyroid diseases. This experimental study was conducted to determine the amount of ccfDNA in different thyroid diseases, then to evaluate whether the ccfDNA concentration varied between the disease groups and control group.
methodsIn total, we included 121 individuals in the present study. We collected blood samples and then determined the ccfDNA concentration in plasma of collected blood samples from three groups: thyroiditis (n=33), benign (n=37), and malignant (n=30) and from a control group (n=21).
resultsThe median values of the ccfDNA groups were found as 1610, 1665, 1685 and 576ng/mL for the thyroiditis, benign, malign, and control groups, respectively. Findings showed that the ccfDNA of the three groups was significantly higher than the control (p<0.0001). Each group was compared in terms of ccfDNA and the p-values of benign-thyroiditis, benign-malign, and thyroiditis-malign were 0.09, 0.65, and 0.29, respectively.
conclusionsThe clear differences between thyroid diseases and controls suggest that ccfDNA is worthy of attention as a biomarker for further evaluation of different thyroid diseases. Likewise, it might indicate a clear tendency that ccfDNA can also be used to distinguish different thyroid diseases.
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.