ReviewFrontiers of medicine2017
Detection of digestive malignancies and post-gastrectomy complications via gastrointestinal fluid examination.
Review in Frontiers of medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Biomarkers for Gastric Cancer Screening and Early Diagnosis.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Inhibitory effects of isocryptotanshinone on gastric cancer.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- A cross-talk between integrin β4 and epidermal growth factor receptor induces gefitinib chemoresistance to gastric cancer.Cancer cell international · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To date, gastric carcinoma (GC) is one of the common and fatal digestive malignancies worldwide. The prognosis of GC is not always satisfactory because of late diagnosis. Scholars are keen on discovering novel accurate and economical biomarkers in body liquids for GC screening to detect and evaluate the lesion before the results of imaging techniques are obtained. While traditional serum assays have limited sensitivity and specificity, gastrointestinal juice may provide relevant specific biomarkers because of its close contact with the tumor. Herein, the current progress in the relationship between gastrointestinal fluid analyses and GC is systematically and comprehensively reviewed. The detection of gastric juice pH, fluorescence spectrum, cytology, Helicobacter pylori-associated markers, nitrosamines, conventional tumor markers, amino acids, proteomics, microRNAs, long noncoding RNAs, protein-coding genes, vitamin C, etc., and combination tests of different category markers could provide important diagnostic and prognostic clues for gastrointestinal diseases. Particularly, early GC may be efficiently screened using gastric juice. Gastrointestinal fluid examination could also predict the adverse effects of postgastrectomy, such as pancreatic leakage, fistula, and abscess. Gastric fluid markers should be further studied to reveal the early predicators of malignancy and complications. The methods for obtaining the samples of gastrointestinal juice with minimum incision should also be comprehensively investigated.
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.