ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2016
Characteristics of colorectal cancer diagnosed with screening abdominal ultrasonography.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient records were retrospectively analyzed to elucidate the characteristics of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed with screening abdominal ultrasound (US). Patients diagnosed with CRC using abdominal US [localized irregular wall thickening (W) or a hypoechoic mass with a hyperechoic mass (M)] were enrolled. The patients were subjected to colonoscopy and treated surgically between March, 2010 and January, 2015. A total of 5 men (aged 74.0±0.8 years) and 10 women (aged 73.0±12.0 years) were analyzed. Stratification was analyzed with abdominal US. The threshold value of wall thickness to diagnose CRC was investigated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The average wall thickness was 2.8±0.4 mm in the surrounding normal tissue and 12.7±5.2 mm in CRC (one-way analysis of variance, P<0.0001). The wall was significantly thicker in CRC compared with the normal colonic wall. The calculated threshold value was 4.3 mm for the diagnosis of CRC. Stratification was preserved in W, while it was lost in M (Chi-squared test, P=0.0196). The hemoglobin concentration was lower, while the C-reactive protein, carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels were elevated above normal values. The threshold value was 4.3 mm for the diagnosis of CRC with abdominal US.
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.