Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34489588›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2021

Synthetic biomarkers: a twenty-first century path to early cancer detection.

Gabriel A Kwong, Sharmistha Ghosh, Lena Gamboa, Christos Patriotis, Sudhir Srivastava, Sangeeta N Bhatia

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

78 citing papers in PubMed, 188 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Understanding and targeting the tumour matrisome.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Gabriel A KwongWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. gkwong@gatech.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6255-6755
Sharmistha GhoshDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. ghoshjanjigias@mail.nih.gov.
Lena GamboaWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Christos PatriotisDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6441-776X
Sudhir SrivastavaDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. srivasts@mail.nih.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7798-9772
Sangeeta N BhatiaInstitute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA. sbhatia@mit.edu.
National Institutes of Health · USGeorgia Institute of Technology · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

Noninvasive and predictive biomarkers of organ transplant rejectionDP2HD091793 · NICHD · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI KWONG, GABRIEL A · 2016 to 2016
$2.4M
Harnessing protease activity for predictive monitoring of cancer immunotherapyR01CA237210 · NCI · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI KWONG, GABRIEL A · 2019 to 2023
$1.7M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNCI NIH HHS R01 CA237210NICHD NIH HHS DP2 HD091793
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detection of cancer at an early stage when it is still localized improves patient response to medical interventions for most cancer types. The success of screening tools such as cervical cytology to reduce mortality has spurred significant interest in new methods for early detection (for example, using non-invasive blood-based or biofluid-based biomarkers). Yet biomarkers shed from early lesions are limited by fundamental biological and mass transport barriers - such as short circulation times and blood dilution - that limit early detection. To address this issue, synthetic biomarkers are being developed. These represent an emerging class of diagnostics that deploy bioengineered sensors inside the body to query early-stage tumours and amplify disease signals to levels that could potentially exceed those of shed biomarkers. These strategies leverage design principles and advances from chemistry, synthetic biology and cell engineering. In this Review, we discuss the rationale for development of biofluid-based synthetic biomarkers. We examine how these strategies harness dysregulated features of tumours to amplify detection signals, use tumour-selective activation to increase specificity and leverage natural processing of bodily fluids (for example, blood, urine and proximal fluids) for easy detection. Finally, we highlight the challenges that exist for preclinical development and clinical translation of synthetic biomarker diagnostics.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorEarly Detection of CancerHumansNeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID34489588
PMCPMC8791024
OpenAlexW3198694797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.