Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38260819›Full record

ReviewBioactive materials2024

SERS sensing for cancer biomarker: Approaches and directions.

Lorena Vázquez-Iglesias, Giovanna Maria Stanfoca Casagrande, Daniel García-Lojo, Letícia Ferro Leal, Tien Anh Ngo, Jorge Pérez-Juste, Rui Manuel Reis, Krishna Kant, Isabel Pastoriza-Santos

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioactive materials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing 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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Dual electrochemical sensor based on graphene aerogel for quantification of ascorbic acid in pharmaceutical samples and uric acid in urine.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. AI-Guided SERS Defines a Pan-Cancer Diagnostic Biomarker.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Lorena Vázquez-IglesiasCINBIO, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Universitario As Lagoas Marcosende, Vigo 36310, Spain.
Giovanna Maria Stanfoca CasagrandeMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Daniel García-LojoCINBIO, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Universitario As Lagoas Marcosende, Vigo 36310, Spain.
Letícia Ferro LealMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Tien Anh NgoVinmec Tissue Bank, Vinmec Health Care System, Hanoi, Viet Nam.
Jorge Pérez-JusteCINBIO, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Universitario As Lagoas Marcosende, Vigo 36310, Spain.
Rui Manuel ReisMolecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Krishna KantCINBIO, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Universitario As Lagoas Marcosende, Vigo 36310, Spain.
Isabel Pastoriza-SantosCINBIO, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Universitario As Lagoas Marcosende, Vigo 36310, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

These days, cancer is thought to be more than just one illness, with several complex subtypes that require different screening approaches. These subtypes can be distinguished by the distinct markings left by metabolites, proteins, miRNA, and DNA. Personalized illness management may be possible if cancer is categorized according to its biomarkers. In order to stop cancer from spreading and posing a significant risk to patient survival, early detection and prompt treatment are essential. Traditional cancer screening techniques are tedious, time-consuming, and require expert personnel for analysis. This has led scientists to reevaluate screening methodologies and make use of emerging technologies to achieve better results. Using time and money saving techniques, these methodologies integrate the procedures from sample preparation to detection in small devices with high accuracy and sensitivity. With its proven potential for biomedical use, surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) has been widely used in biosensing applications, particularly in biomarker identification. Consideration was given especially to the potential of SERS as a portable clinical diagnostic tool. The approaches to SERS-based sensing technologies for both invasive and non-invasive samples are reviewed in this article, along with sample preparation techniques and obstacles. Aside from these significant constraints in the detection approach and techniques, the review also takes into account the complexity of biological fluids, the availability of biomarkers, and their sensitivity and selectivity, which are generally lowered. Massive ways to maintain sensing capabilities in clinical samples are being developed recently to get over this restriction. SERS is known to be a reliable diagnostic method for treatment judgments. Nonetheless, there is still room for advancement in terms of portability, creation of diagnostic apps, and interdisciplinary AI-based applications. Therefore, we will outline the current state of technological maturity for SERS-based cancer biomarker detection in this article. The review will meet the demand for reviewing various sample types (invasive and non-invasive) of cancer biomarkers and their detection using SERS. It will also shed light on the growing body of research on portable methods for clinical application and quick cancer detection.

Indexed as

Cancer biomarkersInvasive and non-invasive biomarkersMicrofluidic devicesPoint of care detectionSurface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS)

Identifiers

PMID38260819
PMCPMC10801148

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.