ReviewThe oncologist2014
Identification of clinically relevant molecular subtypes in colorectal cancer: the dawning of a new era.
Review in The oncologist, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Distant Metastasis in Colorectal Cancer Patients-Do We Have New Predicting Clinicopathological and Molecular Biomarkers? A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Utility of PET Scans in the Diagnosis and Management of Gastrointestinal Tumors.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Article
- Colorectal cancer concurrent gene signature based on coherent patterns between genomic and transcriptional alterations.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging-guided and targeted theranostics of colorectal cancer.Cancer biology & medicine · 2020Review
- GGN Promotes Tumorigenesis by Regulating Proliferation and Apoptosis in Colorectal Cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2019Article
- Article
- Modification of cysteine 457 in plakoglobin modulates the proliferation and migration of colorectal cancer cells by altering binding to E-cadherin/catenins.Redox report : communications in free radical research · 2017Article
- Review
- HLA-G 3'UTR Polymorphisms Impact the Prognosis of Stage II-III CRC Patients in Fluoropyrimidine-Based Treatment.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, a number of protein and genomic-based biomarkers have begun to refine the prognostic information available for colorectal cancer (CRC) and predict defined patient groups that are likely to benefit from systemic treatment or targeted therapies. Of these, KRAS represents the first biomarker integrated into clinical practice for CRC. Microarray-based gene expression profiling has been used to identify prognostic signatures and, to a lesser extent, predictive signatures in CRC. Despite these advances, a number of major challenges remain. This article, which is based on a lecture delivered as part of the 2013 Bob Pinedo Cancer Care Prize, reviews the impact of molecular biomarkers on the management of CRC, emphasizing changes that have occurred in recent years, and focuses on potential mechanisms of patient stratification and opportunities for novel therapeutic development based on enhanced biological understanding of colorectal cancer.
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.