ReviewBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2026
D-Dimer Dynamics as a Prognostic and Monitoring Biomarker in Triple-Negative and Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review.
Review in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remain clinically challenging because of aggressive biology, therapeutic resistance, metastatic dissemination, and substantial heterogeneity. D-dimer, a fibrin-degradation product, may capture systemic coagulation and fibrinolytic activation associated with tumour progression and cancer-associated thrombosis. Objective: This narrative review critically examines D-dimer dynamics as a complementary biomarker for prognostic stratification, treatment monitoring, thrombotic risk assessment, and personalized care in TNBC and MBC. Results: Evidence linking D-dimer with tumour burden, metastasis, survival, inflammation, endothelial activation, platelet-tumour interactions, and venous thromboembolism is synthesized. Particular emphasis is placed on longitudinal trajectories, including declining, stable, persistently elevated, and progressively increasing D-dimer patterns, and their potential interpretation alongside imaging, clinical status, inflammatory markers, circulating tumour DNA, and treatment exposure. Major limitations include assay heterogeneity, differences between fibrinogen-equivalent units and D-dimer units, variable reference ranges and cut-offs, and confounding by age, infection, surgery, renal or hepatic dysfunction, immobility, prior thrombosis, and anticancer treatment. Most available evidence remains observational and therefore establishes association rather than causality or proven clinical utility. Conclusion: D-dimer dynamics represent a promising, accessible component of multimodal precision oncology, but should not independently diagnose progression, select anticancer therapy, or determine anticoagulation. Prospective multicentre studies are needed to standardize assays, validate trajectory-based thresholds, integrate D-dimer with multi-omics and artificial intelligence, and determine whether D-dimer-guided monitoring improves outcomes, particularly in resource-constrained settings and diverse African oncology populations globally appropriately.
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.