ReviewThe journal of liquid biopsy2026
Harmonizing definitions in liquid biopsy: A terminology framework by the international society of liquid biopsy.
Review in The journal of liquid biopsy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Review
- Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Lung Cancer: Promise, Progress, and Persistent Challenges.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Early Breast Cancer: Current and Emerging Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers.Cancers · 2026Review
- Epigenetic profiling of circulating cell-free DNA for early detection and minimal residual disease assessment in lung cancer: a focus on DNA methylation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid expansion of liquid biopsy (LB) throughout the cancer care continuum is evidenced by the striking increase in annual publications, rising from approximately 100 per year in the early 2000s to more than 2200 in recent years. This exponential growth reflects the accelerating impact of LB across precision medicine. However, the field's evolution has been accompanied by inconsistent use of key terminology, creating barriers to clear communication, comparability of results, and appropriate clinical translation. To address this challenge, the International Society of Liquid Biopsy (ISLB) presents a comprehensive and harmonized terminology framework, an essential and timely effort to support the coherent advancement of the LB discipline. ISLB defines LB as the analysis of cells, nucleic acids, proteins, metabolites, and extracellular vesicles used to interrogate pathological or specific physiological conditions, obtained from bodily fluids, primarily through minimally invasive methods. Here we discuss relevant biospecimens, emphasizing their distinct sources and molecular characteristics. A central component of the manuscript is a rigorous clarification of analyte-specific terminology. This includes circulating free DNA and RNA (cfDNA, cfRNA), circulating tumor DNA and RNA (ctDNA, ctRNA), tumor fraction (TF), variant allele frequency (VAF), circulating tumor cells (CTCs), disseminated tumor cells (DTCs), circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs), extracellular vesicles (EVs), tumor-educated platelets (TEPs), soluble proteins, and metabolomic signatures. The manuscript also outlines the analytical methodologies, that enable sensitive detection of low-abundance tumor-derived signals. Clinical applications of LB in Oncology are defined across the disease continuum, including early cancer detection, molecular residual disease (MoRD) assessment, predictive biomarker evaluation, and tumor monitoring. By establishing a cohesive vocabulary, ISLB provides a robust reference framework that will evolve with scientific progress and guide the integration of LB into precision medicine.
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.