ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Liquid Biopsy for Minimal Residual Disease Assessment in Endometrial and Cervical Cancers: Molecular Rationale, Clinical Evidence, and Translational Barriers.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometrial and cervical cancers can recur from subclinical disease not evident on routine surveillance. This narrative review critically evaluates liquid biopsy for minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment and recurrence monitoring. Post-treatment human papillomavirus (HPV) circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in cervical cancer has the strongest disease-specific prospective evidence of clinical validity; persistent detection is strongly associated with recurrence, but moderate sensitivity and false-negative results do not support treatment de-escalation on negativity alone. With regard to endometrial cancer, perioperative ctDNA has prognostic support from an 11-study, 1298-patient meta-analysis and additional cohorts, although assay heterogeneity and limited independent replication constrain clinical readiness. Postoperative positivity generally shows stronger associations than preoperative detection. Cervicovaginal and urine DNA-methylation studies provide preliminary evidence for detecting established recurrence, especially local recurrence, but not prospective molecular lead time or clinical utility. Digital PCR, disease-specific fixed panels, tumor-informed assays, and error-corrected sequencing serve distinct settings; broad pan-cancer plasma profiling remains mainly an advanced-disease tool. Circulating tumor cells, extracellular vesicles, microRNAs, tumor-educated platelets, and fragmentomics remain exploratory. Liquid biopsy should remain an investigational adjunct until prospective trials show that acting on molecular findings improves outcomes.
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.