Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42215793›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2026

Advancing the applications of liquid biopsies in oncology.

Sara Valpione, Alexandra Clipson, Dominic G Rothwell, Caroline Dive, Florent Mouliere

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

5 authors.

Sara ValpioneCancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Alexandra ClipsonCancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Dominic G RothwellCancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Caroline DiveCancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Florent MouliereCancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. florent.mouliere@cruk.manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7043-0514

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid biopsies are increasingly important tools for precision oncology. Although their ability to detect the minute amounts of cancer biomarkers present in biofluids is improving, limitations remain regarding accurate detection of certain pathologies, analytical validation, application range and broad clinical utility. Emerging methods harness multi-omic data from a range of circulating analytes that can be released from various sources via distinct biological processes, thereby providing complementary and more sensitive information. Modulating the cellular release of these analytes and their half-lives in blood can be exploited to inform on cancer detection, treatment selection, response and/or toxicity. Simultaneously, efforts to miniaturize liquid biopsies to capitalize on their minimally invasive nature will accelerate turnaround time and enable continuous and ideally remote monitoring of circulating analytes. Together, these advances towards next-generation liquid biopsies will substantially improve patient experience.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorMedical OncologyNeoplasmsHumansLiquid BiopsyMultiomicsPrecision MedicineBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.