Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31385024›Full record

ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2019

Liquid biopsy for the detection and management of surgically resectable tumors.

Barbara Aldana Blanco, Christopher L Wolfgang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 47% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Barbara Aldana BlancoGeneral Surgery Resident, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Christopher L WolfgangDivision of Surgical Oncology, Surgical Oncology, Pathology and Oncology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. cwolfga2@jhmi.edu.
Boston Medical Center · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditional biopsies have numerous limitations in the developing era of precision medicine, with cancer treatment that relies on biomarkers to guide therapy. Tumor heterogeneity raises the potential for sampling error with the use of traditional biopsy of the primary tumor. Moreover, tumors continuously evolve as new clones arise in the natural course of the disease and under the pressure of treatment. Since traditional biopsy is invasive, it is neither feasible nor practical to perform serial biopsies to guide treatment in real time. PURPOSE: The current manuscript will review the most commonly used types of liquid biopsy and how these apply to surgical patients in terms of diagnosis, prediction of outcome, and guiding therapy.

conclusionsLiquid biopsy has the potential to overcome many of the limitations of traditional biopsy as a highly tailored, minimally invasive, and cost-effective method to screen and monitor response to treatment. However, many challenges still need to be overcome before liquid biopsy becomes a reliable and widely available option.

Indexed as

Liquid BiopsyHumansNeoplasmsPatient SelectionCancerCirculating tumor cellsCirculating tumor DNALiquid biopsyPrecision MedicineTraditional biopsy

Identifiers

PMID31385024
OpenAlexW2965403592

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.