ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
The Early Diagnosis of Lung Cancer: Critical Gaps in the Discovery of Biomarkers.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomics in Lung Cancer Imaging: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- LDCT combined with serum miR-4638-3p expression enhances NSCLC diagnostic efficacy and rs6601178 polymorphism susceptibility association.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Surgical Aspects of Treatment of the Lung Cancer Found in Low-Dose CT-Based Screenings.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Sorting nexin 9 expression and prognostic implications in lung adenocarcinoma: integrative bioinformatic andTranslational cancer research · 2025Article
- Review
- Lung Cancer-Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Treatment and Molecular Aspect (Review of Literature).International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Smart nanoplatforms for early detection and immune modulation in lung cancer.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The main issue is the absence of a screening test available in clinical practice; the identification of noninvasive biomarkers is thus an urgent clinical necessity. Currently, low-dose computed tomography (LD-CT) demonstrates a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality. However, it is not particularly suitable for clinical practice because of its costs, radiation, and false-positive rate. Several studies have therefore focused on research into biomarkers in body fluids. Despite the power of certain molecules to distinguish lung cancer patients from healthy subjects, no biomarker has yet been shown to significantly and reliably influence clinical decisions or to be translated from the laboratory to clinical practice. In this paper, we provide an overview of the peer-reviewed biomedical literature published in the last 10 years on the research regarding biomarkers for the early diagnosis of lung cancer via a comprehensive analysis of the reviews published this past year. Our main objective is to highlight the limitations and strengths of studies on predictive lung cancer biomarkers to stimulate further investigation for early diagnosis. Finally, we discuss future perspectives on managing clinical trials for biomarker research and their integration into clinical practice.
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.