Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33317202›Full record

ReviewCancers2020

Circulating Cell-Free Tumour DNA for Early Detection of Pancreatic Cancer.

Jedrzej J Jaworski, Robert D Morgan, Shivan Sivakumar

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Challenges of early detection of pancreatic cancer.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jedrzej J JaworskiMRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Francis Crick Avenue, Cambridge CB2 0QH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7680-4801
Robert D MorganDepartment of Medical Oncology, Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
Shivan SivakumarDepartment of Oncology, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer is a lethal disease, with mortality rates negatively associated with the stage at which the disease is detected. Early detection is therefore critical to improving survival outcomes. A recent focus of research for early detection is the use of circulating cell-free tumour DNA (ctDNA). The detection of ctDNA offers potential as a relatively non-invasive method of diagnosing pancreatic cancer by using genetic sequencing technology to detect tumour-specific mutational signatures in blood samples before symptoms manifest. These technologies are limited by a number of factors that lower sensitivity and specificity, including low levels of detectable ctDNA in early stage disease and contamination with non-cancer circulating cell-free DNA. However, genetic and epigenetic analysis of ctDNA in combination with other standard diagnostic tests may improve early detection rates. In this review, we evaluate the genetic and epigenetic methods under investigation in diagnosing pancreatic cancer and provide a perspective for future developments.

Indexed as

circulating cell-free tumour DNApancreatic cancerpancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Identifiers

PMID33317202
PMCPMC7763954
OpenAlexW3112170484

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.