ReviewCombinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening2025
Microfluidics-assisted Tumor Cell Separation Approaches for Clinical Applications: An Overview on Emerging Devices.
Review in Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cascading inertial microfluidics for high-throughput, multi-scale enrichment of tumor cells and intact clusters towards enhanced malignancy diagnosis.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Article
- Stem cell revolution: bridging the gap between research and clinical application.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- Enhancing detection and monitoring of circulating tumor cells: Integrative approaches in liquid biopsy advances.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Review
- Digital Magnetic Sorting for Fractionating Cell Populations with Variable Antigen Expression in Cell Therapy Process Development.Magnetochemistry (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Liposomal Nano-Based Drug Delivery Systems for Breast Cancer Therapy: Recent Advances and Progresses.Anti-cancer agents in medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in science and technology have led to revolutions in many scientific and industrial fields. The term lab on a chip, or in other words, performing a variety of complex analyses in just a short time and a minimal space, is a term that has become very common in recent years, and what used to be a dream has now come to life in practice. In this paper, we tried to investigate a specific type of lab technology on a chip, which is, of course, one of the most common, namely the knowledge and technology of cell separation by using a microfluidic technique that can be separated based on size and deformation, adhesion and electrical properties. The tissue of the human body is degraded due to injury or aging. It is often tried to treat this tissue disorder by using drugs, but they are not always enough. Stem cell-based medicine is a novel form that promises the restoration or regeneration of tissues and functioning organs. Although many models of microfluidic systems have been designed for cell separation, choosing the appropriate device to achieve a reliable result is a challenge. Therefore, in this study, Fluorescence Activated Cell Sorting (FACS), Dielectrophoresis (DEP), Magnetic Activated Cell Sorting (MACS), and Acoustic microfluidic system are four distinct categories of active microfluidic systems explored. Also, the advantages, disadvantages, and the current status of the devices mentioned in these methods are reviewed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38275060What 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.