ReviewBrain tumor pathology2023
Liquid biomarkers in glioma.
Review in Brain tumor pathology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ataxin-2 as a candidate blood biomarker for estimating disease status in cases of suspected glioblastoma recurrence.Brain tumor pathology · 2026Article
- Unraveling the role of specificity protein 1 in gliomas: pathophysiology and clinical implications.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Liquid Biopsy as a Diagnostic and Monitoring Tool in Glioblastoma.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- ELK4 induced upregulation of HOMER3 promotes the proliferation and metastasis in glioma via Wnt/β-catenin/EMT signaling pathway.Biology direct · 2025Article
- CuO nanoparticles for glioma treatment in vitro and in vivo.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Prognostic Values of Systemic Inflammatory Immunological Markers in Glioblastoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An ideal biomarker must meet several parameters to enable its successful adoption; however, the nature of glioma makes it challenging to discover valuable biomarkers. While biomarkers require simplicity for clinical implementation, anatomical features and the complexity of the brain make it challenging to perform histological examination. Therefore, compared to biomarkers from general histological examination, liquid biomarkers for brain disease offer many more advantages in these minimally invasive methods. Ideal biomarkers should have high sensitivity and specificity, especially in malignant tumors. The heterogeneous nature of glioma makes it challenging to determine useful common biomarkers, and no liquid biomarker has yet been adopted clinically. The low incidence of brain tumors also hinders research progress. To overcome these problems, clinical applications of new types of specimens, such as extracellular vesicles and comprehensive omics analysis, have been developed, and some candidate liquid biomarkers have been identified. As against previous reviews, we focused on and reviewed the sensitivity and specificity of each liquid biomarker for its clinical application. Perusing an ideal glioma biomarker would help uncover the common underlying mechanism of glioma and develop new therapeutic targets. Further multicenter studies based on these findings will help establish new treatment strategies in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.