Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12477769›Full record

ArticleGut2003

A prospective study of circulating mutant KRAS2 in the serum of patients with colorectal neoplasia: strong prognostic indicator in postoperative follow up.

B M Ryan, F Lefort, R McManus, J Daly, P W N Keeling, D G Weir, D Kelleher

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Gut, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Circulating Cell-Free DNA and Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Circulating DNA Demonstrates Convergent Evolution and Common Resistance Mechanisms during Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Ready for ctDNA-guided treatment decisions in colorectal cancer?Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2023
    Article
  12. Evolution ofCancers · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Circulating tumor DNA profiling for childhood brain tumors: Technical challenges and evidence for utility.Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

B M RyanDepartment of Clinical Medicine, St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. bbryan@planet.nl
F Lefort
R McManus
J Daly
P W N Keeling
D G Weir
D Kelleher
St. James's Hospital · IEHautes Études d'Ingénieur · FRMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsMutant tumour derived DNA has been detected in the sera of colorectal cancer patients. We investigated if mutant serum KRAS2 was detectable preoperatively in a large group of patients with colorectal neoplasia. A prospective study of 94 patients who underwent putative curative resection for colorectal carcinoma (CRC) was performed to ascertain if serum mutant KRAS2 could be used postoperatively as a disease marker.

methodsPreoperative sera from 78 patients were analysed (group A). Sera from 94 patients were obtained three monthly for up to three years during the postoperative period (group B). Codon 12 and 13 KRAS2 mutations were analysed in matched tumour and serum samples.

resultsIn the preoperative group (group A), KRAS2 mutation was found in 41/78 (53%) tumours and in 32/78 (41%) preoperative sera. Of 41 tumour KRAS2 mutation positive cases, 31/41 (76%) had an identical serum mutation detectable. In group B, the postoperative follow up group, 60/94 cases were primary tumour KRAS2 mutation positive. Of these 60, 16/60 (27%) became persistently serum mutant KRAS2 positive postoperatively. Ten of 16 (63%) of these developed a recurrence compared with only 1/44 (2%) patients who remained serum mutant negative (odds ratio 71.7 (95% confidence interval 7.7-663.9; p=0.0000). None of 34 tumour mutation negative cases became serum mutant KRAS2 positive postoperatively, despite recurrence in 9/34 patients. The relative hazard of disease recurrence in postoperative serum mutant KRAS2 positive patients was 6.37 (2.26-18.0; p=0.000).

conclusionsSerum mutant KRAS2 can be detected preoperatively in all stages of colorectal neoplasia. Postoperatively, serum mutant KRAS2 is a strong predictor of disease recurrence, stronger even than Dukes' stage of disease, and thus shows potential for use in clinical practice as a marker of preclinical disease recurrence.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkersCarcinoembryonic AntigenColorectal NeoplasmsDNA Mutational AnalysisDNA, NeoplasmEpidemiologic StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras ProteinsBiomarkersCarcinoembryonic AntigenDNA, NeoplasmKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras Proteins

Identifiers

PMID12477769
PMCPMC1773535
OpenAlexW2153879488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.