ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Molecular Imaging Biomarkers for Early Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of Emerging Technologies and Clinical Applications.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular imaging tracers targeting c-MET: a systematic review of preclinical evidence and clinical translation.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Review
- Dual-modal tumor-selective benzofuran tracer integrating real-time imaging and anticancer effects.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Article
- From imaging to omics: deep learning is bridging MRI and liquid biopsy in bone tumor diagnosis.Journal of bone oncology · 2026Review
- Early Cancer Detection: What's Going on and What's Next.MedComm · 2026Review
- Experimental models of chemical carcinogenesis: bridging toxicology and preclinical pharmacology.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2026Review
- Progress in the Development of Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs) for Medical Imaging of Tumors: Prospects and Challenges.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Oxidative stress and antioxidants in breast cancer: a double-edged sword.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Innovations in Biosensing Technologies for Cancer Diagnosis and Theranostics.Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- Liquid Biopsy and Multi-Omic Biomarkers in Breast Cancer: Innovations in Early Detection, Therapy Guidance, and Disease Monitoring.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Cancer and Aging Biomarkers: Classification, Early Detection Technologies and Emerging Research Trends.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Advances in Optical Contrast Agents for Medical Imaging: Fluorescent Probes and Molecular Imaging.Journal of imaging · 2025Review
- Saliva as a diagnostic frontier: Assessing healthcare students' readiness for salivary biomarkers in early cancer detection.PloS one · 2025Article
- Elevated plasma levels of WAP four-disulfide core domain 2 as a potential prognostic biomarker for various cancers.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Innovative Approaches for the Treatment of Spinal Disorders: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly cancer detection is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Molecular imaging biomarkers offer the potential for non-invasive, early-stage cancer diagnosis.
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and accuracy of molecular imaging biomarkers for early cancer detection across various imaging modalities and cancer types.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was performed, covering the period from January 2010 to December 2023. Eligibility criteria included original research articles published in English on molecular imaging biomarkers for early cancer detection in humans. The risk of bias for included studies was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. The findings were synthesized through narrative synthesis, with quantitative analysis conducted where applicable.
resultsIn total, 50 studies were included. Positron emission tomography (PET)-based biomarkers showed the highest sensitivity (mean: 89.5%, range: 82-96%) and specificity (mean: 91.2%, range: 85-100%). Novel tracers such as [
conclusionsMolecular imaging biomarkers show significant potential for improving early cancer detection. Integration into clinical practice could lead to earlier interventions and improved outcomes. Further research is needed to address standardization and cost-effectiveness.
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.