Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41261726›Full record

ReviewFuture science OA2025

Hydrogel-based devices for cancer diagnostics: a systematic review of materials and biomarkers.

Rosalina Intan Saputri, Adelaide Mensah, Aoife M Rodgers, Petra G Clark, Deborah Lowry, Ahmed Abuelhana, Aaron J Courtenay

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Future science OA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Rosalina Intan SaputriSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0811-6270
Adelaide MensahSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Aoife M RodgersThe Wellcome Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Petra G ClarkSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Deborah LowrySchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Ahmed AbuelhanaSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.
Aaron J CourtenaySchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A promising trend in complex cancer care is personalized therapy, a molecular profiling to tailor treatments to each patient's unique tumor attributes. Different methodologies have been used to identify cancer's mutation profile, including the use of hydrogel in liquid biopsy. This review aims to assess published works describing the performance of hydrogels as diagnostic devices for cancer biomarker detection. A systematic search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines across five databases: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE, and EBSCO. Studies were screened, selected, and assessed for quality. Relevant data were extracted, including the demographics of the studies, characteristics of the hydrogel, cancer, sample characteristics captured, and detection methods. From 33 studies, various types and forms of hydrogels were discussed. This review identified the most used hydrogel polymers, including acrylamide, PEG, DNA, and alginate. The most frequently observed cancer sites were breast, liver, and cervical uteri. In addition, this work reports that the most captured biomarkers were CTCs and protein markers. Hydrogels have demonstrated a promising platform for detecting cancer biomarkers in the early stages of research. Future investigations are required to optimize and validate the hydrogel application as a diagnostic device in the translational stage.

Indexed as

cancerdiagnosisearly detectionHydrogelsamplingsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41261726
PMCPMC12645877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.