ArticleJournal of oncology2021
Prognostic Value of ctDNA Mutation in Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Validity of FoundationOne Liquid CDx for Detection of BRAFV600E in Colorectal Cancer.Cancer research communications · 2025Trial
- Clinical and Radiometabolic Correlatives of ddPCR Liquid Biopsy for BRAF V600 Mutated Melanoma.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Circulating tumor DNA monitoring in advanced mutated melanoma (LIQUID-MEL).The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Article
- Melanoma's New Frontier: Exploring the Latest Advances in Blood-Based Biomarkers for Melanoma.Cancers · 2024Review
- Predictive Significance of Combined Plasmatic Detection of BRAF Mutations and S100B Tumor Marker in Early-Stage Malignant Melanoma.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Harnessing ctDNA in Advanced Melanoma: A Promising Tool for Informed Clinical Decisions.Cancers · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMelanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a diagnostic and prognostic marker of melanoma. However, whether ctDNA mutations can independently predict survival remains controversial. This meta-analysis assessed the prognostic value of the presence or change in ctDNA mutations in melanoma patients.
methodsWe identified studies from the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. We estimated the combined hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using either fixed-effect or random-effect models based on heterogeneity.
resultsSixteen studies including 1,781 patients were included. Both baseline and posttreatment detectable ctDNA were associated with poor OS (baseline detectable vs. undetectable, pooled HR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.64-2.36,
conclusionThe presence or elevation of ctDNA mutation or BRAF
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.