Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34688113›Full record

ReviewBiosensors & bioelectronics2022

Beyond liquid biopsy: Toward non-invasive assays for distanced cancer diagnostics in pandemics.

Francesco Ferrara, Sofia Zoupanou, Elisabetta Primiceri, Zulfiqur Ali, Maria Serena Chiriacò

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biosensors & bioelectronics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Miniaturized Real-Time PCR systems for SARS-CoV-2 detection at the Point-of-Care.Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Cutaneous Oncology: Strategies for Melanoma Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
    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.

Francesco FerraraSTMicroelectronics s.r.l., via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy; CNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy. Electronic address: francesco.ferrara@st.com.
Sofia ZoupanouCNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy; University of Salento, Dept. of Mathematics & Physics E. de Giorgi, Via Arnesano, 73100, Lecce, Italy.
Elisabetta PrimiceriCNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy.
Zulfiqur AliUniversity of Teesside, School of Health & Life Sciences, Healthcare Innovation Centre, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BX, Tees Valley, England, UK.
Maria Serena ChiriacòCNR NANOTEC - Institute of Nanotechnology, via per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy. Electronic address: mariaserena.chiriaco@nanotec.cnr.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsy technologies have seen a significant improvement in the last decade, offering the possibility of reliable analysis and diagnosis from several biological fluids. The use of these technologies can overcome the limits of standard clinical methods, related to invasiveness and poor patient compliance. Along with this there are now mature examples of lab-on-chips (LOC) which are available and could be an emerging and breakthrough technology for the present and near-future clinical demands that provide sample treatment, reagent addition and analysis in a sample-in/answer-out approach. The possibility of combining non-invasive liquid biopsy and LOC technologies could greatly assist in the current need for minimizing exposure and transmission risks. The recent and ongoing pandemic outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, indeed, has heavily influenced all aspects of life worldwide. Ordinary tasks have been forced to switch from "in presence" to "distanced", limiting the possibilities for a large number of activities in all fields of life outside of the home. Unfortunately, one of the settings in which physical distancing has assumed noteworthy consequences is the screening, diagnosis and follow-up of diseases. In this review, we analyse biological fluids that are easily collected without the intervention of specialized personnel and the possibility that they may be used -or not-for innovative diagnostic assays. We consider their advantages and limitations, mainly due to stability and storage and their integration into Point-of-Care diagnostics, demonstrating that technologies in some cases are mature enough to meet current clinical needs.

Indexed as

Biosensing TechniquesCOVID-19NeoplasmsHumansLiquid BiopsyPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Biological fluidsDistanced diagnostic devicesEasy samplingLab-on-chipsLiquid biopsyMarket readiness level

Identifiers

PMID34688113
PMCPMC8527216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.