Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
There is a plethora of published cancer biomarkers but the reality is that very few, if any, new circulating cancer biomarkers have entered the clinic in the last 30 years. I here try to explain this apparent oxymoron by classifying circulating cancer biomarkers into three categories: fraudulent reports (rare); true discoveries of biomarkers, that then fail to meet the demands of the clinic; and false discoveries, which represent artifactual biomarkers. I further provide examples of combinations of some known cancer biomarkers that can perform well in niche clinical applications, despite individually being not useful.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eleftherios P. Diamandis (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: