ArticleCancer research and treatment2026
The Role of Circulating Tumor Cell as a Promising Biomarker in the Evaluation of Pulmonary Nodules: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOur previous study showed that circulating tumor cell (CTC) count combined with gene mutation detection might help differentiate benign and malignant pulmonary nodules (PNs). Herein, we aimed to expand the study cohort and conduct further sequencing analysis. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with PNs were included, and CTCs were identified before operation. Low-coverage whole-genome sequencing (LC-WGS) and lung cancer-related targeted gene sequencing were performed on CTCs. The diagnostic efficacy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The differences in CTC counts among subgroups classified by demographic-clinical characteristics were analyzed. LC-WGS-based copy number variation (CNV) analysis and targeted gene mutation analysis were conducted.
resultsA total of 172 patients were included. CTC count of 2.5 was identified by the ROC curves as the optimal diagnostic cutoff. The sensitivity and specificity of CTC count for differentiating benign and malignant PNs were 54.2% and 78.6%, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of combined CTC count, radiological nodule type, and any malignant imaging features were 84.7% and 71.4%, respectively. The CTC counts were significantly greater in patients with aggressive tumors, later stage, and spread through air spaces. CTCs from malignant cases had more CNVs than those from benign cases.
conclusionCTC count can be used in identifying malignant PNs. The diagnostic efficacy can be improved if combined with computed tomography imaging characteristics. Further CNV analysis might help differential diagnosis. Greater CTC count might suggest more aggressive tumors. CTC detection can provide important information and guidance for subsequent management of PNs.
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.