Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22389639›Full record

ArticleCurrent colorectal cancer reports2012

Epigenetics Offer New Horizons for Colorectal Cancer Prevention.

Michael Schnekenburger, Marc Diederich

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current colorectal cancer reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. [Epigallocatechin gallate inducesNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Tumor suppressor genes in familial adenomatous polyposis.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2017
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael SchnekenburgerLaboratoire de Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire de Cancer, Hôpital Kirchberg, 9, rue Edward Steichen, L-2540 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Marc Diederich
Hôpital Kirchberg · LULaboratoire de Biologie et Modélisation de la Cellule · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence has been increasing to become a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide from cancers, with high rates in westernized societies and increasing rates in developing countries. Epigenetic modifications including changes in DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNAs play a critical role in carcinogenesis. Epidemiological data suggest that, in comparison to other cancers, these alterations are particularly common within the gastrointestinal tract. To explain these observations, environmental factors and especially diet were suggested to both prevent and induce CRC. Epigenetic alterations are, in contrast to genetic modifications, potentially reversible, making the use of dietary agents a promising approach in CRC for the development of chemopreventive strategies targeting epigenetic mechanisms. This review focuses on CRC-related epigenetic alterations as a rationale for various levels of prevention strategies and their potential modulation by natural dietary compounds.

Identifiers

PMID22389639
PMCPMC3277709
OpenAlexW2030134289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.