Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20730520›Full record

ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2011

Evaluation of chromogranin A determined by three different procedures in patients with benign diseases, neuroendocrine tumors and other malignancies.

Rafael Molina, Elias Alvarez, Angeles Aniel-Quiroga, Maria Borque, Belen Candás, Antonio Leon, Rafael M Poyatos, Montserrat Gelabert

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2011. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. NETest2.0Cancers · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Guidelines for biomarker testing in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: a national consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2014
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Rafael MolinaOncobiology Unit, Laboratory of Biochemistry, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, Barcelona, 08036, Spain. rmolina@clinic.ub.es
Elias Alvarez
Angeles Aniel-Quiroga
Maria Borque
Belen Candás
Antonio Leon
Rafael M Poyatos
Montserrat Gelabert
Bellvitge University Hospital · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESHospital de Cruces · ESHospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves · ESHospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESHospital Xeral Calde · ESNovartis (Spain) · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledCgA is a tumor marker in NET's (neuroendocrine tumors) but different ranges of sensitivity and specificity according to the commercial assay kits used have been reported. Our aim was to compare three commercial available assay kits that use three different methodologies (IRMA, RIA and ELISA) to determine CgA, in a clinical setting: 52 healthy people, 98 patients with benign diseases, 94 patients with non-NET´s malignancies, 20 SCLC and in 79 patients with NET's.

resultsUsing a cut-off with a 100% specificity in healthy people (6 nmol/L, 60 ng/ml, and 90 ng/ml, for RIA, ELISA and IRMA, respectively), abnormal serum concentrations of CgA were found in a high proportion of patients with renal failure (76.7% ,86,7% and 93.3% with ELISA; IRMA and RIA, respectively) other benign diseases (excluding patients with creatinine concentrations > 1.5 mg/dl)(40,3%, 50% and 53,2% with ELISA, IRMA and RIA, respectively) or in patients with non-NET´s malignancies (excluding SCLC and patients with renal failure) (59,8% ELISA, 55,4%% IRMA, 37% RIA). The highest CgA sensitivity in SCLC was obtained with ELISA (100%) and in NET´s with ELISA (83.3%) and IRMA (80.3%) (RIA 65.2%). ROC curves comparing healthy people and NET´s or NET´s- benigns showed a significantly higher area under the curve (AUC) with ELISA (0.964 and 0.774), or IRMA (0.955 and 0.785), and smaller with RIA (0,806 and 0.691).

conclusionsCgA is not a specific tumormarker and abnormal concentrations may be found in non-NET´s. The higher AUC, sensitivity and specificity obtained with the ELISA and IRMA indicates that these are the best techniques to determine CgA.

Indexed as

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayImmunoradiometric AssayRadioimmunoassayBiomarkers, TumorCase-Control StudiesChromogranin AHeart FailureHumansInflammatory Bowel DiseasesLiver DiseasesLung NeoplasmsNeuroendocrine TumorsRenal InsufficiencyROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificitySmall Cell Lung CarcinomaBiomarkers, TumorCHGA protein, humanChromogranin A

Identifiers

PMID20730520
OpenAlexW2033684458

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.