ReviewOpen life sciences2023
ctDNA as a prognostic biomarker in resectable CLM: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Open life sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in methotrexate nano-formulations to enhance therapeutic efficacy against drug-resistant breast cancer.Discover nano · 2026Review
- ctDNA in the Management of Resectable & Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Current Status and Future Directions.OncoTargets and therapy · 2026Review
- Review
- Liquid biopsy: Comprehensive overview of circulating tumor DNA (Review).Oncology letters · 2024Review
- Recent Advancements in the Application of Circulating Tumor DNA as Biomarkers for Early Detection of Cancers.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2024Review
- Feasibility of ctDNA in detecting minimal residual disease and predicting recurrence for colorectal cancer liver metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is synthesized by tumor cells, including metastatic tumors, and circulates in the bloodstream. Evidence suggests that ctDNA is a potential predictive and prognostic biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC), but its predictive efficacy in detecting CRC liver metastasis (CLM) remains unclear. Additionally, its utility in the clinical setting needs further investigation. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the utility of ctDNA as a biomarker for predicting the prognosis of CLM and investigate the relationship between CLM and ctDNA positivity. A literature search was performed in electronic databases to identify relevant studies published up to March 19, 2022. We retrieved data on overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for both ctDNA-positive and ctDNA-negative colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) patients from the selected articles. Hazard ratios (HRs) were also calculated for these survival outcomes analysis was also performed. The stability of the combined meta-analysis was verified by sensitivity analysis and publication bias evaluation. Ten trials were included, and 615 patients were evaluated. In patients with CLM, pooled HRs revealed a substantial link between ctDNA positivity and RFS/DFS. Subgroup analysis revealed that ctDNA had a prospective detection value. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias evaluation indicated stable results. Although the results on pooled HR for OS suggested that ctDNA-positive patients had a shorter survival time, their pooled HRs had a relatively evident heterogeneity, and sensitivity analysis and publication bias evaluation indicated that pooled HRs were extremely unstable. In conclusion, our results demonstrate that ctDNA appears to be a prognostic biomarker for resectable CLM patients.
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.