ArticleMedicine2019
Combined use of salivary biomarkers and carcinoembryonic antigen for lung cancer detection in a Chinese population.
Article in Medicine, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Salivary genetic biomarkers of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy.Cancer cell international · 2025Review
- Beyond liquid biopsy: Toward non-invasive assays for distanced cancer diagnostics in pandemics.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2022Review
- Salivary Biomarkers in Lung Cancer.Mediators of inflammation · 2021Review
- Liquid Biopsy is Instrumental for 3PM Dimensional Solutions in Cancer Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Nursing Genetic Research: New Insights Linking Breast Cancer Genetics and Bone Density.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Opportunities for Antibody Discovery Using Human Pluripotent Stem Cells: Conservation of Oncofetal Targets.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood-based biomarkers, such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and saliva-based biomarkers, such as mRNA, have emerged as potential liquid biopsies for non-invasive detection of many cancers. However, current tests typically use single type of biomarkers, and their sensitivity and specificity is often unsatisfactory.In this study, we developed a novel biomarker panel that measures both CEA level in blood and GREB1 and FRS2 levels in saliva to achieve high sensitivity and high specificity in detecting Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).In the discovery phase, we achieved sensitivity of 96.67% and specificity of 93.33% for 30 NSCLC patients and 30 healthy controls. To further evaluate the prediction performance of our biomarker panel, we applied it to an independent set of 15 NSCLC cancer patients and 25 healthy controls. The sensitivity and specificity of our test reached 93.33% and 80.00% respectively.Our study discovered that the combined analysis of CEA and mRNA can be a novel liquid-biopsy technology for non-invasive detection of NSCLC.
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.