Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26297132›Full record

Trial reportDigestive diseases and sciences2016

Fecal Recovery of Ingested Cellular DNA: Implications for Noninvasive Detection of Upper Gastrointestinal Neoplasms.

Benjamin B Strauss, Tracy C Yab, Helen M O'Connor, William R Taylor, Douglas W Mahoney, Julie A Simonson, John Christensen, Suresh T Chari, David A Ahlquist

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin B StraussDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. ben-strauss@northwestern.edu.
Tracy C YabDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. yab.tracy@mayo.edu.
Helen M O'ConnorDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. oconnor.helen@mayo.edu.
William R TaylorDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. wtaylor@mayo.edu.
Douglas W MahoneyBiomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Mahoney@mayo.edu.
Julie A SimonsonDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. simonson.julie@mayo.edu.
John ChristensenDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA.
Suresh T ChariDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. chari.suresh@mayo.edu.
David A AhlquistDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55901, USA. Ahlquist.david@mayo.edu.
Mayo Clinic · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStool DNA testing represents a potential noninvasive approach to detect upper gastrointestinal (UGI) neoplasms. However, little is known about fecal recovery efficiency of DNA exfoliated from UGI tumors.

aimsThe purpose of this study was to establish a human ingestion model that quantitatively approximates daily cellular shedding from UGI neoplasms and to estimate fecal DNA marker recovery rates.

methodsHealthy volunteers (n = 10) ingested two scheduled doses of raw salmon, 0.3 and 30 g, simulating the mass exfoliated daily from 1 to 4.5 cm lesions. To approach a steady-state, each dose was ingested over three consecutive days in randomized order. Following defecation of an indicator dye ingested with test meals, stools were collected over 48 h. Ingested salmon DNA was captured from stools using probes targeting pathognomonic Salmonidae sequences (SlmII). Captured DNA was quantified using PCR primers to generate 178, 138, 88 and 55 bp amplicons.

resultsSlmII sequences were recovered from all stools following salmon ingestion; recovery was proportional to amount ingested (p = 0.004). Fecal recovery of ingested salmon varied inversely with amplicon size targeted; mean recovery rates of SlmII were 0.49, 0.91, 3.63, and 7.31 copies per 100,000 copies ingested for 178, 134, 88, and 55 bp amplicons, respectively (p < 0.0001). Longer oro-anal transit was associated with reduced recovery.

conclusionsWhile recovery efficiencies are low, ingested cellular DNA simulating daily amounts shed from UGI tumors can readily be detected in stool. Assay of shorter-fragment analyte increases recovery. This ingestion model has potential value in studying the effects of perturbations relevant to the fecal recovery of DNA exfoliated from UGI tumors.

Indexed as

Polymerase Chain ReactionSeafoodAnimalsDNA, NeoplasmFecesFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHealthy VolunteersHumansMalePredictive Value of TestsSalmonTime FactorsDNA, NeoplasmFecal DNA recoveryNoninvasive detection of upper gastrointestinal neoplasmsSimulated GI tumor exfoliationStool DNA testing

Identifiers

PMID26297132
OpenAlexW1622513929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.