Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36777187›Full record

ReviewCell genomics2023

Circulating DNA fragmentomics and cancer screening.

A R Thierry

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Cancer-Like Fragmentomic Characteristics of Somatic Variants in Cell-Free DNA.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Metabolic starvation-induced cell swelling drives solid stress in tumors.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  20. Review

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

A R ThierryIRCM, Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier, INSERM U1194, Université de Montpellier, and ICM, Institut régional du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier 34298, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The high fragmentation of nuclear circulating DNA (cirDNA) relies on chromatin organization and protection or packaging within mononucleosomes, the smallest and the most stabilized structure in the bloodstream. The detection of differing size patterns, termed fragmentomics, exploits information about the nucleosomal packing of DNA. Fragmentomics not only implies size pattern characterization but also considers the positioning and occupancy of nucleosomes, which result in cirDNA fragments being protected and persisting in the circulation. Fragmentomics can determine tissue of origin and distinguish cancer-derived cirDNA. The screening power of fragmentomics has been considerably strengthened in the omics era, as shown in the ongoing development of sophisticated technologies assisted by machine learning. Fragmentomics can thus be regarded as a strategy for characterizing cancer within individuals and offers an alternative or a synergistic supplement to mutation searches, methylation, or nucleosome positioning. As such, it offers potential for improving diagnostics and cancer screening.

Indexed as

cancer early detectioncancer screeningcirculating DNAfragmentationfragmentomicssequencingsize profile

Identifiers

PMID36777187
PMCPMC9903826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.