4.7 Review

Blood-Based Analyses of Cancer: Circulating Tumor Cells and Circulating Tumor DNA

期刊

CANCER DISCOVERY
卷 4, 期 6, 页码 650-661

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-1014

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. NIH [CA-129933, NIBIB-EB008047, CA-121113]
  3. Entertainment Industry Foundation [SU2C-AACR-DT0309, SU2C-AACR-DT0509]
  4. Breast Cancer Research Foundation
  5. National Foundation for Cancer Research
  6. Johnson & Johnson Center for Excellence in CTCs at Massachusetts General Hospital
  7. European Community's Seventh Framework Programme
  8. Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation
  9. John G. Ballenger Trust
  10. Commonwealth Foundation
  11. Stand Up To Cancer Dream Team Translational Cancer Research Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability to study nonhematologic cancers through noninvasive sampling of blood is one of the most exciting and rapidly advancing fields in cancer diagnostics. This has been driven both by major technologic advances, including the isolation of intact cancer cells and the analysis of cancer cell-derived DNA from blood samples, and by the increasing application of molecularly driven therapeutics, which rely on such accurate and timely measurements of critical biomarkers. Moreover, the dramatic efficacy of these potent cancer therapies drives the selection for additional genetic changes as tumors acquire drug resistance, necessitating repeated sampling of cancer cells to adjust therapy in response to tumor evolution. Together, these advanced noninvasive diagnostic capabilities and their applications in guiding precision cancer therapies are poised to change the ways in which we select and monitor cancer treatments. Significance: Recent advances in technologies to analyze circulating tumor cells and circulating tumor DNA are setting the stage for real-time, noninvasive monitoring of cancer and providing novel insights into cancer evolution, invasion, and metastasis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据