Correction: Use of extracellular vesicles from lymphatic drainage as surrogate markers of melanoma progression and

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Frozen melanoma tissues yield extracellular vesicles with preserved diagnostic and immunogenic properties.BMC medicine · 2026
   Article
2. Extracellular vesicles as prognostic biomarkers: results of a neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy clinical trial in stage IIIA (N2) non-small-cell lung cancer (SAKK 16/14).Frontiers in immunology · 2026
   Article
3. Liquid Biopsy Strategies to Distinguish Progression from Pseudoprogression and Radiation Necrosis in Glioblastomas.Advanced biosystems · 2020
   Review
4. The Current State of Molecular Testing in the BRAF-Mutated Melanoma Landscape.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2020
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Use of extracellular vesicles from lymphatic drainage as surrogate markers of melanoma progression and2019

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.