ArticleTranslational cancer research2019
Validation of the diagnostic efficiency of folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cells in lung cancers: a prospective observational study.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of folate receptor-positive circulating tumour cells as a diagnostic biomarker for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Pooled it
- Potential clinical utility of liquid biopsy in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.BMC medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cells in differentiating between benign and malignant pulmonary nodules.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Bibliometric and visualized analysis of applying tumor markers in lung cancer diagnosis from 2000 to 2022.Cancer innovation · 2023Review
- Non-small cell lung cancer in China.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study sought to validate the clinical value of folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cell (FR+CTC) for the diagnosis of lung cancers.
methodsSeventy-five lung cancer patients and 71 non-malignant participants (including 48 benign lung disease patients and 23 healthy subjects) were enrolled in this study. Three milliliters of the whole blood sample was collected from all the participants (before surgery for cancer patients). FR+CTC analysis was performed using "CytoploRare Detection Kit". The expression level of serum biomarkers, including carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cytokeratin fragment 19 (CYFRA21-1), and neuron-specific enolase (NSE), were also tested in cancer and benign lung disease patients.
resultsThe median FR+CTC level in lung cancers (10.5 CTC units/3 mL blood) was significantly higher than that of the non-malignant group (5.9 CTC units/3 mL blood, P<0.0001). No significant difference in FR+CTC level was observed between patients with different age, gender, and pathological subtype (P>0.05), except for clinical stage (stages I-III versus stage IV: P=0.0169). With 7.9 CTC units/3 mL blood as the cut-off threshold, FR+CTC showed superior sensitivity (78.7%) and specificity (81.7%) in the diagnosis of lung cancers. The detection rate of FR+CTC was significantly higher compared to CEA (24.0%), CYFRA21-1 (48.0%), and NSE (16.0%). The diagnostic efficiency of FR+CTC was similar in stage I lung cancers (n=25, sensitivity =68.0% and specificity =90.1%).
conclusionsOur results support that FR+CTC is an independent and efficacious biomarker in the diagnosis of lung cancers. FR+CTC detection can be used to assist in early-stage thoracic cancer diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.