ReviewFrontiers in genetics2023
Advances in early detection methods for solid tumors.
Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epigenetic paradigm of DNA methylation for understanding the pathophysiology, diagnostics, and therapeutics in sarcomas.Epigenomics · 2025Review
- Overcoming barriers to advanced biomolecular technologies that inform treatment of solid tumors: a roadmap to access.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Enhancing detection and monitoring of circulating tumor cells: Integrative approaches in liquid biopsy advances.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Review
- Review
- Editorial: Enhancing innate immunity in combination therapy for solid tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- CTC, ctDNA, and Exosome in Thyroid Cancers: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Particle Counting Methods Based on Microfluidic Devices.Micromachines · 2023Review
- Microfluidics engineering towards personalized oncology-a review.In vitro models · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the last decade, non-invasive methods such as liquid biopsy have slowly replaced traditional imaging and invasive pathological methods used to diagnose and monitor cancer. Improvements in the available detection methods have enabled the early screening and diagnosis of solid tumors. In addition, advances in early detection methods have made the continuous monitoring of tumor progression using repeat sampling possible. Previously, the focus of liquid biopsy techniques included the following: 1) the isolation of circulating tumor cells, circulating tumor DNA, and extracellular tumor vesicles from solid tumor cells in the patient's blood; in addition to 2) analyzing genomic and proteomic data contained within the isolates. Recently, there has been a rapid devolvement in the techniques used to isolate and analyze molecular markers. This rapid evolvement in detection techniques improves their accuracy, especially when few samples are available. In addition, there is a tremendous expansion in the acquisition of samples and targets for testing; solid tumors can be detected from blood and other body fluids. Test objects have also expanded from samples taken directly from cancer to include indirect objects affected in cancer development. Liquid biopsy technology has limitations. Even so, this detection technique is the key to a new phase of oncogenetics. This review aims to provide an overview of the current advances in liquid biopsy marker selection, isolation, and detection methods for solid tumors. The advantages and disadvantages of liquid biopsy technology will also be explored.
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.