Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26922358›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2016

Stool Investigations for Colorectal Cancer Screening: From Occult Blood Test to DNA Analysis.

Andrea Iannone, Giuseppe Losurdo, Maria Pricci, Bruna Girardi, Antonio Massaro, Mariabeatrice Principi, Michele Barone, Enzo Ierardi, Alfredo Di Leo

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Novel Diagnostic Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrea IannoneSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Giuseppe LosurdoSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Maria PricciSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Bruna GirardiSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Antonio MassaroSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Mariabeatrice PrincipiSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Michele BaroneSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Enzo IerardiSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Alfredo Di LeoSection of Gastroenterology, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy. a.dileo@gastro.uniba.it.
University of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe report an update of current methods for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening based on fecal sample analysis.

methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Direct electronic databases.

resultsBlood in the stools is the first and most used strategy. Fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) are the main methods. Both are economic, easy to perform with high specificity, and low sensitivity. Based on CRC multi-step process with genetic and epigenetic alterations in large bowel cell DNA, single mutations or panels of alterations have been detected. These tests have the advantage of a marked improvement of the sensitivity when compared to fecal blood. However, high costs, poor availability, and correct choice of marker panel represent the major limits. A specific sDNA panel including aberrantly methylated BMP3 and NDRG4 promoter regions, mutant k-ras and β-actin (a reference gene for human DNA quantity), and an immunochemical assay for human hemoglobin has been recently approved by Food and Drug Administration. Novel promising biomarkers for CRC screening are represented by microRNAs (miRNAs), a group of 18-25 nucleotide non-coding RNA molecules that regulate gene expression. Reports on these fecal biomarkers are case-control studies, and each of them evaluates single miRNAs or multi-target panels. On the other hand, some fecal proteins have been studied as possible CRC screening markers, even though they demonstrated poor results. Finally, alterations of estrogen receptor-beta (i.e., dramatic reduction in the early stage of CRC) have been demonstrated in tissue samples.

conclusionsSpecific investigations are warranted in order to add further noninvasive markers to the panel of CRC screening tools.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsDNAEarly Detection of CancerFecesHumansMass ScreeningOccult BloodDNAAdenomaColorectal cancerFecal DNAFecal immunochemical testFecal occult blood testScreening

Identifiers

PMID26922358
OpenAlexW2276179377

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.