ReviewCancers2026
Liquid Biopsy and Molecular Biomarkers in Mucinous Appendiceal and Colorectal Tumors: Current Evidence and Unmet Challenges in Precision Oncology.
Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mucinous appendiceal and colorectal tumors represent a biologically and clinically distinct subset of gastrointestinal malignancies, defined by abundant extracellular mucin, characteristic molecular alterations, and a strong predilection for peritoneal dissemination. Despite these distinctive features, they remain relatively underrepresented in biomarker-driven clinical frameworks, and evidence specific to liquid biopsy performance in this subgroup is fragmented. These features complicate clinical assessment and limit the applicability of tissue-based and circulating biomarkers that perform well in non-mucinous colorectal cancer. Although liquid biopsy is now integral to precision oncology across multiple solid tumors, its role in mucinous disease remains incompletely defined. This review synthesizes evidence on liquid biopsy and molecular biomarkers in mucinous appendiceal and colorectal tumors, with emphasis on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and emerging multi-analyte approaches. Rather than extrapolating from non-mucinous colorectal cancer paradigms, we examine liquid biopsy performance through the lens of mucinous tumor biology and peritoneal compartmentalization. We summarize how peritoneal-dominant spread, limited vascular access, low tumor cellularity, and sequestration of malignant cells within mucin pools constrain biomarker shedding into peripheral blood and contribute to low ctDNA detectability. We discuss the clinical implications for postoperative surveillance after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, molecular profiling when tissue is limited, and longitudinal monitoring in selected patient subsets. A central focus is the context-dependent interpretation of positive versus negative plasma findings, particularly in low-shedding disease, where false reassurance may occur. We also review strategies beyond plasma ctDNA, including compartment-specific sampling and non-mutational platforms that may improve sensitivity in low-shedding settings. By integrating biological rationale with comparative findings across studies, we identify key evidence gaps and priorities for prospective, biologically stratified validation. We further outline practical considerations for integrating liquid biopsy results into multidisciplinary decision-making in mucinous malignancies. Aligning biomarker class and sampling compartment with mucinous tumor biology may improve interpretability and support more precise clinical management.
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.