Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34465006›Full record

ArticleMolecular oncology2021

Clinical potential of circulating free DNA and circulating tumour cells in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer treated with pembrolizumab.

Patricia Mondelo-Macía, Jorge García-González, Luis León-Mateos, Urbano Anido, Santiago Aguín, Ihab Abdulkader, María Sánchez-Ares, Alicia Abalo, Aitor Rodríguez-Casanova, Ángel Díaz-Lagares and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Circulating Tumor Cells for the Monitoring of Lung Cancer Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

14 authors.

Patricia Mondelo-MacíaLiquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2741-4073
Jorge García-GonzálezDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Luis León-MateosDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Urbano AnidoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Santiago AguínDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ihab AbdulkaderDepartment of Pathology, Complexo Hospital Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
María Sánchez-AresDepartment of Pathology, Complexo Hospital Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Alicia AbaloLiquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Aitor Rodríguez-CasanovaCancer Epigenomics, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ángel Díaz-LagaresCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer (CIBERONC), Madrid, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ramón Manuel Lago-LestónLiquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Laura Muinelo-RomayLiquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Rafael López-LópezDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela (SERGAS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Roberto Díaz-PeñaLiquid Biopsy Analysis Unit, Translational Medical Oncology (Oncomet), Health Research Institute of Santiago (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0114-2292

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as pembrolizumab, are revolutionizing therapeutic strategies for different cancer types, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, only a subset of patients benefits from this therapy, and new biomarkers are needed to select better candidates. In this study, we explored the value of liquid biopsy analyses, including circulating free DNA (cfDNA) and circulating tumour cells (CTCs), as a prognostic or predictive tool to guide pembrolizumab therapy. For this purpose, a total of 109 blood samples were collected from 50 patients with advanced NSCLC prior to treatment onset and at 6 and 12 weeks after the initiation of pembrolizumab. Plasma cfDNA was measured using hTERT quantitative PCR assay. The CTC levels at baseline were also analysed using two enrichment technologies (CellSearch

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCell-Free Nucleic AcidsLung NeoplasmsNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBiomarkers, TumorDNAHumansAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBiomarkers, TumorCell-Free Nucleic AcidsDNApembrolizumabbiomarkerscfDNACTCsimmunotherapyNSCLCPD-L1

Identifiers

PMID34465006
PMCPMC8564635

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.