ReviewAdvanced biomedical research2025
Review of Plasma Exosomal DNA for Detecting EGFR Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).
Review in Advanced biomedical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consolidated Evidence and New Frontiers of Liquid Biopsy in Lung Cancer: A Narrative Review.Cells · 2026Review
- Comparative survival outcomes between EGFR-wildtype and EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy: a retrospective cohort study from national cancer center in China.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review systematically evaluated the literature on detecting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using plasma exosomal DNA by analyzing data from eight studies selected from a comprehensive literature search (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science; 2010-2024). The findings revealed a wide range of EGFR mutation prevalence (10%-26.8%) across studies, with most mutations located in exons 19 and 21. Comparative analysis highlighted the potential of plasma exosomal DNA (exDNA) as a non-invasive alternative to tissue biopsy, although significant heterogeneity in sensitivity and specificity was observed across liquid biopsy methods (including circulating tumor cells and exDNA analyses). This heterogeneity underscores the need for standardization and further validation to optimize the clinical utility of plasma exDNA in detecting EGFR mutations, monitoring treatment response, and identifying resistance mechanisms in NSCLC.
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.