ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2008
From the genome to the proteome--biomarkers in colorectal cancer.
Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serum tests for colorectal cancer screening.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2011Pooled it
- AI-enabled multi-omics integration in colorectal cancer: from molecular stratification to clinical translation.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Systems-level biomarkers identification and drug repositioning in colorectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Article
- Molecular profiling of cetuximab and bevacizumab treatment of colorectal tumours reveals perturbations in metabolic and hypoxic response pathways.Oncotarget · 2015Article
- MicroRNAs: promising biomarkers for diagnosis and therapeutic targets in human colorectal cancer metastasis.BMB reports · 2015Review
- An integrative framework identifies alternative splicing events in colorectal cancer development.Molecular oncology · 2014Article
- Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology · 2011Review
- Cell surface markers in colorectal cancer prognosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2010Review
- Biomarkers for colorectal cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2010Review
- The focus of Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery in the 21st century.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2010Article
- Global epigenetic screening technologies: a novel tool to address cancer health disparities in high-risk population groups.Puerto Rico health sciences journal · 2008Article
- Innovations, challenges and future prospects of oncoproteomics.Molecular oncology · 2008Review
- Genetic tests and genomic biomarkers: regulation, qualification and validation.Clinical cases in mineral and bone metabolism : the official journal of the Italian Society of Osteoporosis, Mineral Metabolism, and Skeletal Diseases · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsColorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death. Current clinical practice in colorectal cancer screening (fecal occult blood test, FOBT; colonoscopy) has contributed to a reduction of mortality. However, despite these screening programs, about 70% of carcinomas are detected at advanced tumor stages (UICC III/IV) presenting poor patient prognosis. Thus, innovative tools and methodologies for early cancer detection can directly result in improving patient survival rates. PATIENTS/
methodsBiomedical research has advanced rapidly in recent years with the availability of technologies such as global gene and protein expression profiling. Comprehensive tumor profiling has become a field of intensive research aiming at identifying biomarkers relevant for improved diagnostics and therapeutics.
resultsIn this paper, we report a comprehensive review of genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic approaches for biomarker identification in tissue and blood with a main emphasis on two-dimensional gel-electrophoresis (2-DE) and mass spectrometry analyses.
conclusionProteomics-based technologies enable to distinguish the healthy patient from the tumor patient with high sensitivity and specificity and could greatly improve common classification systems and diagnostics. However, this progress has not yet been transferred from bench to bedside but could open the door to a more accurate and target specific personalized medicine with improved patient survival.
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.