ReviewCancers2022
Biorecognition Engineering Technologies for Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Literature Review of Non-Conventional and Plausible Sensor Development Methods.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- The sensitive and selective electrochemical detection of carcinoembryonic antigen using a nanoMIPs-aptamer sandwich assay.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advances in Extracellular Vesicle Nanotechnology for Precision Theranostics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Advances of Epigenetic Biomarkers and Epigenome Editing for Early Diagnosis in Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer is the second cause of mortality worldwide. Early diagnosis of this multifactorial disease is challenging, especially in populations with limited access to healthcare services. A vast repertoire of cancer biomarkers has been studied to facilitate early diagnosis; particularly, the use of antibodies against these biomarkers has been of interest to detect them through biorecognition. However, there are certain limitations to this approach. Emerging biorecognition engineering technologies are alternative methods to generate molecules and molecule-based scaffolds with similar properties to those presented by antibodies. Molecularly imprinted polymers, recombinant antibodies, and antibody mimetic molecules are three novel technologies commonly used in scientific studies. This review aimed to present the fundamentals of these technologies and address questions about how they are implemented for cancer detection in recent scientific studies. A systematic analysis of the scientific peer-reviewed literature regarding the use of these technologies on cancer detection was carried out starting from the year 2000 up to 2021 to answer these questions. In total, 131 scientific articles indexed in the Web of Science from the last three years were included in this analysis. The results showed that antibody mimetic molecules technology was the biorecognition technology with the highest number of reports. The most studied cancer types were: multiple, breast, leukemia, colorectal, and lung. Electrochemical and optical detection methods were the most frequently used. Finally, the most analyzed biomarkers and cancer entities in the studies were carcinoembryonic antigen, MCF-7 cells, and exosomes. These technologies are emerging tools with adequate performance for developing biosensors useful in cancer detection, which can be used to improve cancer diagnosis in developing countries.
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.