ReviewWorld journal of clinical oncology2014
Genomic era diagnosis and management of hereditary and sporadic colon cancer.
Review in World journal of clinical oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Genetic Testing in the Cancer Management and Prevention.Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics · 2025Article
- Multiomic analysis of familial adenomatous polyposis reveals molecular pathways associated with early tumorigenesis.Nature cancer · 2024Article
- Cholesterol Promotes Colorectal Cancer Growth by Activating the PI3K/AKT Pathway.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- Elevated expression of p53 in early colon polyps in a pig model of human familial adenomatous polyposis.Journal of applied genetics · 2018Article
- Genetic Testing for Polyposis Syndromes.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016Review
- Familial Colorectal Cancer: Understanding the Alphabet Soup.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016Review
- Heterozygous colon cancer-associated mutations of SAMHD1 have functional significance.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016Article
- Aberrant methylation patterns in cancer: a clinical view.Biochemia medica · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The morbidity and mortality attributable to heritable and sporadic carcinomas of the colon are substantial and affect children and adults alike. Despite current colonoscopy screening recommendations colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC) still accounts for almost 140000 cancer cases yearly. Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a colon cancer predisposition due to alterations in the adenomatous polyposis coli gene, which is mutated in most CRC. Since the beginning of the genomic era next-generation sequencing analyses of CRC continue to improve our understanding of the genetics of tumorigenesis and promise to expand our ability to identify and treat this disease. Advances in genome sequence analysis have facilitated the molecular diagnosis of individuals with FAP, which enables initiation of appropriate monitoring and timely intervention. Genome sequencing also has potential clinical impact for individuals with sporadic forms of CRC, providing means for molecular diagnosis of CRC tumor type, data guiding selection of tumor targeted therapies, and pharmacogenomic profiles specifying patient specific drug tolerances. There is even a potential role for genomic sequencing in surveillance for recurrence, and early detection, of CRC. We review strategies for diagnostic assessment and management of FAP and sporadic CRC in the current genomic era, with emphasis on the current, and potential for future, impact of genome sequencing on the clinical care of these conditions.
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.