Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34571783›Full record

ArticleBiology2021

Current Trends in Cell-Free DNA Applications. Scoping Review of Clinical Trials.

Robert Stawski, Emilia Stec-Martyna, Adam Chmielecki, Dariusz Nowak, Ewelina Perdas

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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.

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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Neutrophils and the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS).International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors.

Robert StawskiDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Medical University of Lodz, 92-215 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4164-4817
Emilia Stec-MartynaCentral Scientific Laboratory, Medical University of Lodz, 6/8 Mazowiecka St., 92-215 Lodz, Poland.
Adam ChmieleckiSport Centre of the Medical University of Lodz, Medical University of Lodz, 92-215 Lodz, Poland.
Dariusz NowakDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Medical University of Lodz, 92-215 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3445-6930
Ewelina PerdasDepartment of Biostatistics and Translational Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, 92-215 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2321-2976

Funding

Narodowym Centrum Nauki DEC-2020/04/X/NZ4/00154
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to summarize the current knowledge about the trends in cfDNA application based on the analysis of clinical trials registered until April 2021. International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched with the keywords: "cf-DNA"; "Circulating DNA"; "Deoxyribonucleic Acid"; and "Cell-Free Deoxyribonucleic Acid". Of 605 clinical trials, we excluded 237 trials, and 368 remaining ones were subject to further analysis. The subject, number of participants, and study design were analyzed. Our scoping review revealed three main trends: oncology (n = 255), non-invasive prenatal diagnostic (n = 48), and organ transplantation (n = 41), and many (n = 22) less common such as sepsis, sport, or autoimmune diseases in 368 clinical trials. Clinical trials are translating theory into clinical care. However, the diagnostic value of cfDNA remains controversial, and diagnostic accuracy still needs to be evaluated. Thus, further studies are necessary until cfDNA turns into a standard in clinical practice.

Indexed as

cancercf-DNAclinical trialsct-DNAdd cf-DNANIPT

Identifiers

PMID34571783
PMCPMC8468988

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.