Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37725979›Full record

ReviewCell reports. Medicine2023

Extrinsic and intrinsic preanalytical variables affecting liquid biopsy in cancer.

Syeda Maheen Batool, Tiffaney Hsia, Alexandra Beecroft, Brian Lewis, Emil Ekanayake, Yulia Rosenfeld, Ana K Escobedo, Austin S Gamblin, Siddarth Rawal, Richard J Cote and 11 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell reports. Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

21 authors.

Syeda Maheen BatoolMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Tiffaney HsiaMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Alexandra BeecroftMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Brian LewisMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Emil EkanayakeMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Yulia RosenfeldMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Ana K EscobedoMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Austin S GamblinMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Siddarth RawalWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA; Circulogix Inc., St. Louis, MO, USA.
Richard J CoteWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA; Circulogix Inc., St. Louis, MO, USA.
Mark WatsonWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
David T W WongUniversity of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abhijit A PatelYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Johan SkogExosome Diagnostics, Waltham, MA 02451, USA.
Nickolas PapadopoulosJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Chetan BettegowdaJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Cesar M CastroMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Hakho LeeMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Sudhir SrivastavaCancer Biomarkers Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Bob S CarterMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Leonora BalajMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: Balaj.Leonora@mgh.harvard.edu.

Funding

The role of microvesicles in giloma virotherapyP01CA069246 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CHIOCCA, E. ANTONIO · 1996 to 2021
$30.9M
Proteomic, Genomic, and Longitudinal Pathways to Ovarian Cancer Biomarker DiscoveryU01CA152990 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BIRRER, MICHAEL, SKATES, STEVEN J · 2010 to 2021
$8.9M
Genome-wide methylation and proteomic analysis of uterine lavage and cervical swab for early detection of ovarian cancerU2CCA271871 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Steven J Skates · 2022 to 2026
$4.5M
Liquid Biopsy for treatment stratification of IDH1.R132H and EGFRvIII mutant gliomasU01CA230697 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CARTER, BOB S, SKOG, JOHAN · 2018 to 2022
$4.0M
Early Detection through Novel OCEAN Technology - Ovarian Cancer Exosomal Analysis with NanoplasmonicsU01CA233360 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CASTRO, CESAR M, DINULESCU, DANIELA M · 2018 to 2022
$3.5M
Lung Cancer Screening via Ultrasensitive and Cost-efficient Analysis of Tumor DNA Signatures in BloodU01CA233364 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI PATEL, ABHIJIT, SKATES, STEVEN J · 2018 to 2022
$3.4M
Clinical platform for high-throughput analyses of extracellular vesiclesR01CA229777 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI LEE, HAKHO, SKOG, JOHAN · 2018 to 2022
$3.2M
Imaging and Liquid Biopsy for Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment MonitoringR01CA239078 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BALAJ, LEONORA, LEE, HAKHO · 2020 to 2024
$3.1M
Standardized Molecular Analyses of Glioma EVsR01CA237500 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CARTER, BOB S, LEE, HAKHO · 2020 to 2024
$3.0M
High throughput nanoplasmonic exosome testing (NEXT) of immunotherapies in bladder cancerR01CA264363 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CASTRO, CESAR M, LEE, HAKHO · 2021 to 2024
$2.4M
3D Fourier Imaging System for High Throughput Analyses of Cancer OrganoidsR21CA267222 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI LEE, HAKHO · 2022 to 2024
$613k
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA069246NCI NIH HHS R01 CA229777NCI NIH HHS R01 CA237500NCI NIH HHS R01 CA239078NCI NIH HHS R01 CA264363NCI NIH HHS R21 CA267222NCI NIH HHS U01 CA152990NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230697NCI NIH HHS U01 CA233360NCI NIH HHS U01 CA233364NCI NIH HHS U2C CA271871
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsy, through isolation and analysis of disease-specific analytes, has evolved as a promising tool for safe and minimally invasive diagnosis and monitoring of tumors. It also has tremendous utility as a companion diagnostic allowing detection of biomarkers in a range of cancers (lung, breast, colon, ovarian, brain). However, clinical implementation and validation remains a challenge. Among other stages of development, preanalytical variables are critical in influencing the downstream cellular and molecular analysis of different analytes. Although considerable progress has been made to address these challenges, a comprehensive assessment of the impact on diagnostic parameters and consensus on standardized and optimized protocols is still lacking. Here, we summarize and critically evaluate key variables in the preanalytical stage, including study population selection, choice of biofluid, sample handling and collection, processing, and storage. There is an unmet need to develop and implement comprehensive preanalytical guidelines on the optimal practices and methodologies.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsBiomarkersHumansLiquid BiopsyBiomarkersliquid biopsypreanalytical variables

Identifiers

PMID37725979
PMCPMC10591035

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.