ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2021
Pleural biomarkers in diagnostics of malignant pleural effusion: a narrative review.
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of SHOX2 and RASSF1A gene methylation assays in malignant pleural effusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer cytopathology · 2025Pooled it
- Targeted detection of amino acid profiles in pleural fluid and serum by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for estimating the risks of four aetiologies of pleural effusion: a proof-of-concept study.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Biochemistry-based machine learning algorithms in differentiating pleural effusion: current status and perspective.ERJ open research · 2026Review
- A Three-Step Diagnostic Strategy for Malignant Pleural Effusions.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Pleural fluid C-C motif chemokine ligand 2 as a diagnostic biomarker for malignant pleural effusion.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Development and external validation of machine-learning models for diagnosing malignant pleural effusion.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Incremental predictive value of a CT-based deep learning radiomics model for differentiating benign and malignant pleural effusions.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Using CIC and HoCIC as diagnostic biomarkers for malignant pleural and ascitic effusion.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic value of pleural fluid neuron-specific enolase for malignant pleural effusion.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of pleural fluid carbohydrate antigen 242 for malignant pleural effusion.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Development of a scoring system based on a nomogram to identify malignant pleural effusion.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of pleural fluid, serum carcinoembryonic antigen, and their ratio for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Effects of light's criteria on the diagnostic accuracy of pleural fluid carcinoembryonic antigen concentrations for malignant pleural effusion.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Pleural fluid human epididymis secretory protein 4 in differentiating between malignant and benign pleural effusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of SHOX-2 methylation for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Assessment of diagnostic efficacy: High fluorescent cells combined with CEA, NSE, and Cyfra21-1 in Malignant Pleural Effusion Identification.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of pleural fluid carbohydrate antigen 72-4 for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Influence of age and sex on the diagnostic accuracy of pleural fluid carcinoembryonic antigen for malignant pleural effusion: aFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A novel approach in the identification of microRNAs in malignant pleural effusion for lung cancer diagnosis.Oncology reviews · 2025Review
- Endostatin-based anti-angiogenic therapy and immune modulation: mechanisms and synergistic potential in cancer treatment.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although cytology and pleural biopsy of pleural effusion (PE) are the gold standards for diagnosing malignant pleural effusion (MPE), these tools' diagnostic accuracy is plagued by some limitations such as low sensitivity, considerable inter-observer variation and invasiveness. The assessment of PE biomarkers may hence be seen as an objective and non-invasive diagnostic alternative in MPE diagnostics. In this review, we summarize the characteristics and diagnostic accuracy of available PE biomarkers, including carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), carbohydrate antigens 125 (CA125), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3), a fragment of cytokeratin 19 (CYFRA 21-1), chitinase-like proteins (CLPs), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its soluble receptor, endostatin, calprotectin, cancer ratio, homocysteine, apolipoprotein E (Apo-E), B7 family members, matrix metalloproteinase (MMPs) and tissue-specific inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs), reactive oxygen species modulator 1 (Romo1), tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and monocytes, epigenetic markers (e.g., cell-free microRNA and mRNA). We summarized the evidence from systematic review and meta-analysis for traditional tumor markers' diagnostic accuracy. According to the currently available evidence, we conclude that the traditional tumor markers have high specificity (around 0.90) but low sensitivity (around 0.50). The diagnostic accuracy of novel tumor markers needs to be validated by further studies. None of these tumor biomarkers would have sufficient diagnostic accuracy to confirm or exclude MPE when used alone. A multi-biomarker strategy, also encompassing the use of artificial intelligence algorithms, may be a valuable perspective for improving the diagnostic accuracy of MPE.
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.