ReviewMolecular oncology2025
Subpar reporting of pre-analytical variables in RNA-focused blood plasma studies.
Review in Molecular oncology, 2025. 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.
- Circulating RNA as a Functional Component of Liquid Biopsy in Cancer: Concepts, Classification, and Clinical Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Liquid biopsy epigenetics: establishing a molecular profile based on cell-free DNA.Molecular oncology · 2026Review
- Navigating the molecular landscape: integrated multiomics liquid biopsy for biomarker discovery in early detection and monitoring of colorectal cancer.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
- Extracellular RNAs as Messengers and Early Biomarkers in Neurodegeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Comprehensive Liquid Biopsy Approaches for the Clinical Management of Lung Cancer Using Multiple Biological Matrices.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Characterizing the Cell-Free Transcriptome in a Humanized Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Patient-Derived Tumor Xenograft Model for RNA-Based Liquid Biopsy in a Preclinical Setting.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Human Aging and Age-Related Diseases: From Underlying Mechanisms to Pro-Longevity Interventions.Aging and disease · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracellular RNA (cell-free RNA; exRNA) from blood-derived liquid biopsies is an appealing, minimally invasive source of disease biomarkers. As pre-analytical variables strongly influence exRNA measurements, their reporting is essential for meaningful interpretation and replication of results. The aim of this review was to chart to what extent pre-analytical variables are documented, to pinpoint shortcomings and to improve future reporting. In total, 200 blood plasma exRNA studies published in 2018 or 2023 were reviewed for annotation of 22 variables associated with blood collection, plasma preparation, and RNA purification. Our results show that pre-analytical variables are poorly documented, with only three out of 22 variables described in over half of the publications. The percentage of variables reported ranged from 4.6% to 54.6% (mean 24.84%) in 2023 and from 4.6% to 57.1% (mean 28.60%) in 2018. Recommendations and guidelines (i.e., BRISQ, ASCO-CAP, BloodPAC, PPMPT, and CEN standards) have currently not resulted in improved reporting. In conclusion, our results highlight the lack of reporting pre-analytical variables in exRNA studies and advocate for a consistent use of available standards, endorsed by funders and journals.
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.