Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40255897›Full record

ReviewThe journal of liquid biopsy2025

The growing field of liquid biopsy and its Snowball effect on reshaping cancer management.

Roberto Borea, Carolina Reduzzi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of liquid biopsy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

2 authors.

Roberto BoreaDepartment of Public Health, University Federico II of Naples, Naples, Italy.
Carolina ReduzziDepartment of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, 10021, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsy (LB) has emerged as a transformative tool in oncology, providing a minimally invasive approach for tumor detection, molecular characterization, and real-time treatment monitoring. By analyzing circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), circulating tumor cells (CTCs), extracellular vesicles (EVs), and microRNA (miRNA), LB enables comprehensive tumor profiling without the need for traditional tissue biopsies. Over the past decade, research in this field has expanded exponentially, leading to the integration of LB into clinical practice for specific cancer types, including lung and breast cancer. In 2024, the Journal of Liquid Biopsy (JLB) published innovative studies exploring the latest advancements in LB technologies, biomarkers, and their applications for cancer detection, minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring, and therapy response assessment. This review synthesizes recent findings on the role of LB in cancer treatment and monitoring across different biomarkers, with a particular focus on newly published studies and their context within translational research. Additionally, it highlights emerging techniques such as fragmentomics, artificial intelligence, and multiomics, paving the way for more precise, personalized treatment decisions. Despite these advancements, challenges remain in standardizing methodologies, optimizing clinical validation, and integrating LB into routine oncological workflows. This mini-review highlights the evolving landscape of LB research and its potential to revolutionize cancer diagnosis, treatment monitoring, and therapeutic decision-making, ushering in a new era of precision oncology.

Indexed as

Circulating tumor cells/CTCsCirculating tumor DNA/ctDNALiquid biopsyMicroRNA/miRNASolid tumors

Identifiers

PMID40255897
PMCPMC12008596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.