Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26974538›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

The Role of Biliary Carcinoembryonic Antigen-Related Cellular Adhesion Molecule 6 (CEACAM6) as a Biomarker in Cholangiocarcinoma.

J Bart Rose, Camilo Correa-Gallego, Yu Li, James Nelson, Adnan Alseidi, W Scott Helton, Peter J Allen, Michael I D'Angelica, Ronald P DeMatteo, Yuman Fong and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. The emerging roles of CEACAM6 in human cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

J Bart RoseSection of General, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Camilo Correa-GallegoHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Yu LiBenaroya Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
James NelsonBenaroya Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Adnan AlseidiSection of General, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
W Scott HeltonSection of General, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Peter J AllenHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Michael I D'AngelicaHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Ronald P DeMatteoHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Yuman FongDepartment of Surgery, City of Hope Cancer Center, Duarte, California, United States of America.
T Peter KinghamHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Kris V KowdleySection of General, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
William R JarnaginHepatopancreatobiliary Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Flavio G RochaSection of General, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USVirginia Mason Medical Center · USBenaroya Research InstituteCity of Hope · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the present study is to determine if CEACAM6 can be detected in the bile of patients with biliary cancer and can serve as a diagnostic biomarker for cholangiocarcinoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Distinguishing bile duct carcinoma from other diagnoses is often difficult using endoscopic or percutaneous techniques. The cell surface protein CEACAM6 is over-expressed in many gastrointestinal cancers and may be selectively elevated in biliary adenocarcinoma.

methodsBile from patients with benign biliary disease and cholangiocarcinoma (hilar, intrahepatic and distal) was collected at the time of index operation. The concentration of CEACAM6 was quantified by sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and correlated to pathologic diagnosis. Diagnostic capability of CEACAM6 was evaluated by Wilcoxon rank-sum, linear regression, multiple regression, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

resultsBile from 83 patients was analyzed: 42 with benign disease and 41 with cholangiocarcinoma. Patients in the benign cohort were younger, predominantly female, and had lower median biliary CEACAM6 levels than patients in the malignant cohort (7.5 ng/ml vs. 40 ng/ml; p = <.001). ROC curve analysis determined CEACAM6 to be a positive predictor cholangiocarcinoma with a CEACAM6 level >14 ng/ml associated with 87.5% sensitivity, 69.1% specificity, and a likelihood ratio of 2.8 (AUC 0.74). Multiple regression analysis suggested elevated alkaline phosphatase and the presence of biliary endoprostheses may influence CEACAM6 levels.

conclusionBiliary CEACAM6 can identify patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with a high degree of sensitivity and should be investigated further as a potential screening tool.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntigens, CDBileBile Duct NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCell Adhesion MoleculesCholangiocarcinomaCohort StudiesFemaleGPI-Linked ProteinsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm ProteinsAntigens, CDBiomarkers, TumorCEACAM6 protein, humanCell Adhesion MoleculesGPI-Linked ProteinsNeoplasm Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26974538
PMCPMC4790932
OpenAlexW2298587538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.