Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21151433›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2010

Proteomic serum biomarkers and their potential application in cancer screening programs.

Anouck Huijbers, Berit Velstra, Tim J A Dekker, Wilma E Mesker, Yuri E M van der Burgt, Bart J Mertens, André M Deelder, Rob A E M Tollenaar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Application Value of Mass Spectrometry in the Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Liver Tumors.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017
    Article
  7. Noninvasive detection of gastric cancer.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Screening for colorectal cancer: established and emerging modalities.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2011
    Review
  15. 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.

Anouck HuijbersDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands; E-Mails: a.huijbers@lumc.nl (A.H.); b.velstra@lumc.nl (B.V.); w.e.mesker@lumc.nl (W.E.M.).
Berit Velstra
Tim J A Dekker
Wilma E Mesker
Yuri E M van der Burgt
Bart J Mertens
André M Deelder
Rob A E M Tollenaar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early diagnosis of cancer is of pivotal importance to reduce disease-related mortality. There is great need for non-invasive screening methods, yet current screening protocols have limited sensitivity and specificity. The use of serum biomarkers to discriminate cancer patients from healthy persons might be a tool to improve screening programs. Mass spectrometry based proteomics is widely applied as a technology for mapping and identifying peptides and proteins in body fluids. One commonly used approach in proteomics is peptide and protein profiling. Here, we present an overview of profiling methods that have the potential for implementation in a clinical setting and in national screening programs.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm ProteinsProteomicsBiomarkers, TumorNeoplasm Proteinsbiomarkerbreast cancercolorectal cancermagnetic beadsMALDI-TOFmass spectrometryproteomicsscreeningSELDI-TOF

Identifiers

PMID21151433
PMCPMC3000077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.