Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36900369›Full record

ReviewCancers2023

Liquid Biopsies, Novel Approaches and Future Directions.

Athanasios Armakolas, Maria Kotsari, John Koskinas

Full text readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing 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

69 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

9 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

3 authors.

Athanasios ArmakolasPhysiology Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
Maria KotsariPhysiology Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 115 27 Athens, Greece.
John KoskinasB' Department of Medicine, Hippokration Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 115 27 Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-4375-4454

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide. Early diagnosis and prognosis are vital to improve patients' outcomes. The gold standard of tumor characterization leading to tumor diagnosis and prognosis is tissue biopsy. Amongst the constraints of tissue biopsy collection is the sampling frequency and the incomplete representation of the entire tumor bulk. Liquid biopsy approaches, including the analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs), circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), circulating miRNAs, and tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs), as well as certain protein signatures that are released in the circulation from primary tumors and their metastatic sites, present a promising and more potent candidate for patient diagnosis and follow up monitoring. The minimally invasive nature of liquid biopsies, allowing frequent collection, can be used in the monitoring of therapy response in real time, allowing the development of novel approaches in the therapeutic management of cancer patients. In this review we will describe recent advances in the field of liquid biopsy markers focusing on their advantages and disadvantages.

Indexed as

cancerclinical applicationsCTCsctDNAdiagnosisexosomesmiRNAprognosisproteome

Identifiers

PMID36900369
PMCPMC10000663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read21
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.