Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34192550›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2021

Lack of predictive tools for conventional and targeted cancer therapy: Barriers to biomarker development and clinical translation.

Nikolaos Batis, Jill M Brooks, Karl Payne, Neil Sharma, Paul Nankivell, Hisham Mehanna

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06787053 (Selecting Hypoxic Tumours for Treatment Modification), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06787053 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Selecting Hypoxic Tumours for Treatment Modification

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of ManchesterRan2024 to 2028Enrolled30ConditionsBladder (Urothelial, Transitional Cell) Cancer, Prostate Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A modular framework for antibody-drug conjugate biomarkers.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Cancer Metastasis: Therapeutic Challenges and Opportunities.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Nikolaos Batis *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Electronic address: n.batis@bham.ac.uk.
Jill M Brooks *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Karl Payne *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Neil Sharma *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Paul Nankivell *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Hisham Mehanna *Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Electronic address: h.mehanna@bham.ac.uk.

Funding

Cancer Research UK C11497/A28789Cancer Research UK CRUK/13/026Cancer Research UK CRUK-A12617Medical Research Council MR/S005498/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predictive tools, utilising biomarkers, aim to objectively assessthe potentialresponse toa particular clinical intervention in order to direct treatment.Conventional cancer therapy remains poorly served by predictive biomarkers, despite being the mainstay of treatment for most patients. In contrast, targeted therapy benefits from a clearly defined protein target for potential biomarker assessment. We discuss potential data sources of predictive biomarkers for conventional and targeted therapy, including patient clinical data andmulti-omicbiomarkers (genomic, transcriptomic and protein expression).Key examples, either clinically adopted or demonstrating promise for clinical translation, are highlighted. Following this, we provide an outline of potential barriers to predictive biomarker development; broadly discussing themes of approaches to translational research and study/trial design, and the impact of cellular and molecular tumor heterogeneity. Future avenues of research are also highlighted.

Indexed as

Molecular Targeted TherapyBiomarkers, TumorGene Expression ProfilingGenomicsHumansNeoplasmsProteinsTranslational Research, BiomedicalBiomarkers, TumorProteinsIntra-tumoral heterogeneityLiquid biopsyMulti-omicsPredictive biomarkerPredictive signaturePredictive toolTreatment responseTrial designTumor microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID34192550
PMCPMC8448142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.