ReviewScience progress
Advancements in non-invasive biomarkers for detection and monitoring of breast cancer recurrence.
Review in Science progress. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of long non-coding RNA HCG11 in human cancers: From molecular mechanisms to clinical applications (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- Nano-biosensors for circulating tumor markers: advancing liquid biopsy toward precision cancer diagnostics.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Breast cancer pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Emerging Breast Cancer Subpopulations: Functional Heterogeneity Beyond the Classical Subtypes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer recurrence remains a major cause of mortality, with up to 30% of early-stage patients relapsing as incurable metastatic disease. Conventional surveillance with imaging and serum markers (CA15-3, CEA) lacks the sensitivity and specificity to detect minimal residual disease. This narrative review examines non-invasive biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and exosomes and the technologies enhancing their performance. Droplet digital PCR and next-generation sequencing detect ctDNA at allele frequencies below 0.1%, identifying molecular relapse a median of 10-12 months before radiologic progression. Microfluidic and affinity-based platforms isolate CTCs with over 75% sensitivity in metastatic settings. Nanoengineered sensors and standardized workflows improve exosome isolation, revealing miRNA and protein signatures predictive of recurrence. Proteomic and metabolomic profiling identify dysregulated metabolic pathways and protein networks, offering functional insights that complement molecular assays. Integrative multi-omics approaches merge genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic data; machine-learning frameworks detect subtle patterns and correlations, enabling dynamic, personalized surveillance. By detecting molecular and functional biomarkers early, clinicians can tailor therapy, monitor treatment response and intervene promptly. Challenges include low analyte abundance, assay variability, high costs and lack of standardized protocols, limiting clinical adoption. Prospective validation in large cohorts is critical. We highlight ongoing clinical trials such as ctDNA-guided adjuvant therapy and CTC-driven stratification studies that aim to establish clinical utility. Non-invasive biomarker platforms could shift breast cancer follow-up from reactive detection to proactive intervention, ultimately improving survival and quality of life through personalized, real-time monitoring.
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.