Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31635038›Full record

ReviewCancers2019

Single-Cell Analysis of Circulating Tumor Cells: Why Heterogeneity Matters.

Su Bin Lim, Chwee Teck Lim, Wan-Teck Lim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Role of Circulating Biomarkers in Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Su Bin LimNUS Graduate School for Integrative Sciences & Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117456, Singapore. sblim@u.nus.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1752-7039
Chwee Teck LimNUS Graduate School for Integrative Sciences & Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117456, Singapore. ctlim@nus.edu.sg.ORCID 0000-0003-4019-9782
Wan-Teck LimDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore 169610, Singapore. darren.lim.w.t@singhealth.com.sg.

Funding

National Medical Research Council NMRC/CSA/040/2012, NMRC/CSA-INV/0025/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlike bulk-cell analysis, single-cell approaches have the advantage of assessing cellular heterogeneity that governs key aspects of tumor biology. Yet, their applications to circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are relatively limited, due mainly to the technical challenges resulting from extreme rarity of CTCs. Nevertheless, recent advances in microfluidics and immunoaffinity enrichment technologies along with sequencing platforms have fueled studies aiming to enrich, isolate, and sequence whole genomes of CTCs with high fidelity across various malignancies. Here, we review recent single-cell CTC (scCTC) sequencing efforts, and the integrated workflows, that have successfully characterized patient-derived CTCs. We examine how these studies uncover DNA alterations occurring at multiple molecular levels ranging from point mutations to chromosomal rearrangements from a single CTC, and discuss their cellular heterogeneity and clinical consequences. Finally, we highlight emerging strategies to address key challenges currently limiting the translation of these findings to clinical practice.

Indexed as

cellular heterogeneitycirculating tumor cellssingle-cell analysis

Identifiers

PMID31635038
PMCPMC6826423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.