ArticleClinical proteomics2017
Discovery and validation of a colorectal cancer classifier in a new blood test with improved performance for high-risk subjects.
Article in Clinical proteomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Composite proteomic and metabolomic plasma biomarkers for detection of colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers.Molecular cancer · 2026Article
- The performance of FIT-based and other risk prediction models for colorectal neoplasia in symptomatic patients: a systematic review.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Review
- Hsp90-stabilized MIF supports tumor progression via macrophage recruitment and angiogenesis in colorectal cancer.Cell death & disease · 2021Article
- Advancing the Care of Pancreatic Cancer Patients: Moving Beyond Just Tumour Tissue.Biomarker insights · 2021Review
- Multiplexed Immunosensors and Immunoarrays.Analytical chemistry · 2020Review
- Primary prostate cancer educates bone stroma through exosomal pyruvate kinase M2 to promote bone metastasis.The Journal of experimental medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim was to improve upon an existing blood-based colorectal cancer (CRC) test directed to high-risk symptomatic patients, by developing a new CRC classifier to be used with a new test embodiment. The new test uses a robust assay format-electrochemiluminescence immunoassays-to quantify protein concentrations. The aim was achieved by building and validating a CRC classifier using concentration measures from a large sample set representing a true intent-to-test (ITT) symptomatic population.
methods4435 patient samples were drawn from the
resultsThe final classifier was a logistic regression using ten predictors: eight proteins (A1AG, CEA, CO9, DPPIV, MIF, PKM2, SAA, TFRC), age, and gender. In validation, the indeterminate rate of the new panel was 23.2%, sensitivity/specificity was 0.80/0.83, PPV was 36.5%, and NPV was 97.1%.
conclusionsThe validated classifier serves as the basis of a new blood-based CRC test for symptomatic patients. The improved performance, resulting from robust concentration measures across a large sample set mirroring the ITT population, renders the new test the best available for this population. Results from a test using this classifier can help assess symptomatic patients' CRC risk, increase their colonoscopy compliance, and manage next steps in their care.
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.