ReviewScandinavian journal of gastroenterology2011
Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?
Review in Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Triage May Improve Selection to Colonoscopy and Reduce the Number of Unnecessary Colonoscopies.Cancers · 2020Article
- Development of blood-based biomarker tests for early detection of colorectal neoplasia: Influence of blood collection timing and handling procedures.Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry · 2020Article
- Clean Colorectum at Diagnostic Colonoscopy: Subsequent Detection of Extracolonic Malignancies by Plasma Protein Biomarkers?Biomarkers in cancer · 2018Article
- Protocol Outlines for Parts 1 and 2 of the Prospective Endoscopy III Study for the Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer: Validation of a Concept Based on Blood Biomarkers.JMIR research protocols · 2016Article
- miRNA profiling of circulating EpCAM(+) extracellular vesicles: promising biomarkers of colorectal cancer.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2016Article
- Performance of the colorectal cancer screening marker Sept9 is influenced by age, diabetes and arthritis: a nested case-control study.BMC cancer · 2015Article
- Blood-based tests for colorectal cancer screening: do they threaten the survival of the FIT test?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2015Review
- Blood-based Biomarkers at Large Bowel Endoscopy and Prediction of Future Malignancies.Biomarkers in cancer · 2015Article
- Evaluation of complement proteins as screening markers for colorectal cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2015Article
- Management of colorectal cancer and diabetes.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2014Review
- Detection of serological biomarkers by proximity extension assay for detection of colorectal neoplasias in symptomatic individuals.Journal of translational medicine · 2013Article
- Data fusion in metabolomic cancer diagnostics.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2013Article
- Early detection of cancer in the general population: a blinded case-control study of p53 autoantibodies in colorectal cancer.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging results indicate that screening improves survival of patients with colorectal cancer. Therefore, screening programs are already implemented or are being considered for implementation in Asia, Europe and North America. At present, a great variety of screening methods are available including colono- and sigmoidoscopy, CT- and MR-colonography, capsule endoscopy, DNA and occult blood in feces, and so on. The pros and cons of the various tests, including economic issues, are debated. Although a plethora of evaluated and validated tests even with high specificities and reasonable sensitivities are available, an international consensus on screening procedures is still not established. The rather limited compliance in present screening procedures is a significant drawback. Furthermore, some of the procedures are costly and, therefore, selection methods for these procedures are needed. Current research into improvements of screening for colorectal cancer includes blood-based biological markers, such as proteins, DNA and RNA in combination with various demographically and clinically parameters into a "risk assessment evaluation" (RAE) test. It is assumed that such a test may lead to higher acceptance among the screening populations, and thereby improve the compliances. Furthermore, the involvement of the media, including social media, may add even more individuals to the screening programs. Implementation of validated RAE and progressively improved screening methods may reform the cost/benefit of screening procedures for colorectal cancer. Therefore, results of present research, validating RAE tests, are awaited with interest.
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.