ReviewCancer metastasis reviews2026
The right patient, the right moment, the right therapy: reimagining precision oncology from the bedside.
Review in Cancer metastasis reviews, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision oncology has delivered an unprecedented expansion of molecularly targeted therapies, yet patient selection remains the defining unmet need of the field. Too many patients receive treatments that will not benefit them, while those most likely to respond go unidentified. Drawing on two decades of translational work in treatment-refractory triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), this Perspective argues that the central question of oncology's next decade is not what new drug to develop, but which patient should receive which therapy, at which moment, and why. We articulate a biology-first framework for precision patient selection built on multi-omic tumor profiling, longitudinal liquid biopsy with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) monitoring, tumor microenvironment (TME) characterization, and disease-specific criteria for rare subtypes that do not follow conventional patterns of response and progression. The poor response of metastatic hormone receptor-positive IBC to CDK4/6 inhibition illustrates why selection criteria validated in common populations can mislead when applied to biologically distinct diseases. From these lessons, we propose five principles for next-generation trial design: multi-omic entry criteria, longitudinal biomarker integration as adaptive decision points, microenvironment-aware stratification, disease-specific frameworks for rare subtypes, and preemptive resistance monitoring. Equitable implementation is framed not as an aspiration but as a structural requirement, since a selection framework that cannot reach underrepresented patients has failed before deployment. Realizing true precision oncology requires treating eligibility as a dynamic biological state, reassessed throughout treatment, rather than a snapshot fixed at enrollment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42911423What 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.