Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35815441›Full record

ReviewVeterinary and comparative oncology2022

Blood biomarkers for canine cancer, from human to veterinary oncology.

Philippe Colombe, Jérémy Béguin, Ghita Benchekroun, Delphine Le Roux

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary and comparative oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Beyond the Needle: Is Liquid Biopsy the Future of Veterinary Medicine?International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Low-Invasive Biomarkers of Canine Mammary Tumours.Veterinary medicine and science · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

4 authors.

Philippe ColombeEcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, BioPôle Alfort, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Jérémy BéguinEcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, CHUVA, Service de Médecine Interne, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Ghita BenchekrounEcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, CHUVA, Service de Médecine Interne, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Delphine Le RouxEcole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, BioPôle Alfort, Maisons-Alfort, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3252-9155

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent decades, interest in circulating tumour biomarkers is increasing both in human and veterinary oncology. An ideal tumour biomarker would allow early diagnosis of neoplasia, identify it specifically, accurately, establish a prognosis and predict its behaviour, especially regarding different therapeutic solutions. It would also allow to monitor its evolution over time and all this in a non-invasive and inexpensive way. Actually, no biomarkers meeting all of these criteria have been identified in veterinary medicine, particularly due to a lack of specificity of the main protein tumour biomarkers studied to date. However, great hope is currently placed in biomarkers grouped under the name of liquid biopsy, which could prove to be effective tools for common clinical use in the near future. This review gives an update on blood cancer biomarkers studied in dogs, such as ions, proteins, nucleic acids and also circulating cells, of which some might become more prominent in the coming years to help improve the management of animal care.

Indexed as

Dog DiseasesNeoplasmsAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorDogsHumansLiquid BiopsyPrognosisBiomarkers, Tumorbiomarkercancerliquid biopsyveterinary

Identifiers

PMID35815441
PMCPMC9796515

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.