Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33942482›Full record

ReviewMolecular oncology2021

Detection and relevance of epigenetic markers on ctDNA: recent advances and future outlook.

Evi Lianidou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Biological multi-omics approaches to next-generation biomarkers in immune-related disorders and malignancies: An overview.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

1 author.

Evi LianidouAnalysis of Circulating Tumor Cells, Laboratory of Analytical Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-7796-5914

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsy, a minimally invasive approach, is a highly powerful clinical tool for the real-time follow-up of cancer and overcomes many limitations of tissue biopsies. Epigenetic alterations have a high potential to provide a valuable source of innovative biomarkers for cancer, owing to their stability, frequency, and noninvasive accessibility in bodily fluids. Numerous DNA methylation markers are now tested in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as potential biomarkers, in various types of cancer. DNA methylation in combination with liquid biopsy is very powerful in identifying circulating epigenetic biomarkers of clinical importance. Blood-based epigenetic biomarkers have a high potential for early detection of cancer since DNA methylation in plasma can be detected early during cancer pathogenesis. In this review, we summarize the latest findings on DNA methylation markers in ctDNA for early detection, prognosis, minimal residual disease, risk of relapse, treatment selection, and resistance, for breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancer.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNADNA MethylationDrug Resistance, NeoplasmHumansNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNAcell-free DNAcirculating tumor cellscirculating tumor DNADNA methylationmethylation-specific PCRminimal residual disease

Identifiers

PMID33942482
PMCPMC8169441

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.