ArticleBritish journal of cancer2000
Limitations of CD44v6 amplification for the detection of tumour cells in the blood of colorectal cancer patients.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Detection and evaluation of epithelial cells in the blood of colon cancer patients using RT-PCR.International journal of clinical oncology · 2006Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Based on the important role of CD44 splice variants in colorectal cancer progression and metastasis, we evaluated the use of CD44v6 expression to detect and assess the metastatic potential of colorectal tumour cells circulating in peripheral blood. A nested amplification was designed that allowed to detect 10-100 colon cancer cells. This assay was applied to blood samples from healthy donors. Strong signals were detected in all cases, indicating that it cannot be used to detect colorectal carcinoma cells in whole blood. We then included an enrichment step based on the use of an anti-epithelial cells monoclonal antibody (BerEP4) coupled to magnetic beads. The CD44v6 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT PCR) assay was performed on cDNA synthesized from blood samples treated with these beads. We analysed 18 samples from 12 patients with a gastrointestinal disease, and 36 samples from ten patients with a colorectal cancer. None of the patients used as negative controls were found to contain epithelial cells in their blood as determined by cytokeratin 19 RT-PCR. By contrast, CD44 transcripts containing exon v6 were detected in nine out of the 18 samples tested (50%). For the colorectal cancer patients, six out of the seven samples (85.7%) that were cytokeratin 19-positive were CD44v6-negative, whereas ten samples out of the 29 not containing epithelial cells were CD44v6-positive (34.5%). This is probably due to the persistence of CD8+ leucocytes in the enriched preparations, as determined by PCR analysis of the CD8 alpha-chain. We conclude that detection of CD44v6 transcripts using a sensitive nested RT-PCR assay has no potential value to detect and characterize colorectal cancer micrometastases from blood, even following an initial enrichment step.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.