| Title |
Review of the clinical applications and technological advances of circulating tumor DNA in cancer monitoring
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s141991 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yi Chang, Bhairavi Tolani, Xiuhong Nie, Xiuyi Zhi, Mu Hu, Biao He |
| Abstract |
Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) released by tumor cells, termed ctDNA, closely reflects the heterogeneity of primary cancers and their metastases. As a noninvasive, real-time monitoring biomarker, ctDNA is a promising tool for detecting driver gene mutations, assessing tumor burden and acquired resistance, and early diagnosis. However, isolation and enrichment of cfDNA is a big challenge due to the high degree of DNA fragmentation and its relatively low abundance in the bloodstream. This review aims to provide insights into the recent technological advances in acquisition of optimal quality cfDNA, the use of preservatives, isolation methods, processing timelines, and detection techniques. It also describes clinical applications of ctDNA in cancer patient management. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 104 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 14% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 13% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 37 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,359,319
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#379
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,310
of 331,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#8
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.