ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Liquid biopsy for children with central nervous system tumours: Clinical integration and technical considerations.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cerebrospinal fluid cell-free DNA sequencing in pediatric CNS tumors: towards liquid molecular neuropathology.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Review
- Cerebrospinal Fluid in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology: Molecular Diagnosis, Disease Monitoring, and Clinical Translation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The Application Value of Liquid Biopsy in Cancer MRD Detection and the Preliminary Clinical Significance of the TFx Value.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- The Clinical Utility of Cell-Free DNA in Brain Tumor Management: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2025Review
- Stratified Medicine Pediatrics: Cell-Free DNA and Serial Tumor Sequencing Identifies Subtype-Specific Cancer Evolution and Epigenetic States.Cancer discovery · 2025Article
- A comprehensive overview of liquid biopsy applications in pediatric solid tumors.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Review
- DICER1-associated central nervous system sarcoma: A comprehensive clinical and genomic characterization of case series of young adult patients.Neuro-oncology practice · 2023Article
- Cell-Free DNA Extracted from CSF for the Molecular Diagnosis of Pediatric Embryonal Brain Tumors.Cancers · 2023Article
- Novel therapeutic approaches for pediatric diencephalic tumors: improving functional outcomes.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Cerebrospinal fluid liquid biopsy by low-pass whole genome sequencing for clinical disease monitoring in pediatric embryonal tumors.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis has the potential to revolutionise the care of patients with cancer and is already moving towards standard of care in some adult malignancies. Evidence for the utility of cfDNA analysis in paediatric cancer patients is also accumulating. In this review we discuss the limitations of blood-based assays in patients with brain tumours and describe the evidence supporting cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cfDNA analysis. We make recommendations for CSF cfDNA processing to aid the standardisation and technical validation of future assays. We discuss the considerations for interpretation of cfDNA analysis and highlight promising future directions. Overall, cfDNA profiling shows great potential as an adjunct to the analysis of biopsy tissue in paediatric cancer patients, with the potential to provide a genetic molecular profile of the tumour when tissue biopsy is not feasible. However, to fully realise the potential of cfDNA analysis for children with brain tumours larger prospective studies incorporating serial CSF sampling are required.
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.