SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2018
Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer.
Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
76 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 144 citations in OpenAlex.
- Where do we stand with screening for colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma based on serum protein biomarkers? A systematic review.Molecular oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer: systematic review using the HTA Core ModelGerman medical science : GMS e-journal · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of DNA-based SDC2 methylation test in colorectal cancer screening: a meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Breath analysis for the detection of digestive tract malignancies: systematic review.BJS open · 2021Pooled it
- Transcriptional Activity of Genes Related to the Biotransformation Process in the Development of Colorectal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Exosomal microRNA Panels for Detecting Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exosomal tsRNA-Gly-5-0007 may be used as a diagnostic marker for colorectal cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Linear inverse association between prognostic nutritional index and colorectal cancer risk based on NHANES data.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Fundamentals and research progression on electrochemical sensing of colorectal cancer.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Review
- Development and validation of a logistic regression model for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Screening colorectal cancer associated autoantigens through multi-omics analysis and diagnostic performance evaluation of corresponding autoantibodies.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Prognostic markers and molecular pathways in primary colorectal cancer with a high potential of liver metastases: a systems biology approach.Research in pharmaceutical sciences · 2025Article
- Non-invasive early-stage cancer detection: current methods and future perspectives.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Review
- Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer: Actual and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Discovery and Validation of Methylation Signatures in Circulating Cell-Free DNA for the Detection of Colorectal Cancer.Biomolecules · 2024Article
- Implementable assay for monitoring minimum residual disease after radical treatment for colorectal cancer.Cancer science · 2024Article
- A panorama of colon cancer in the era of liquid biopsy.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2024Review
- Colorectal cancer screening: A review of current knowledge and progress in research.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Review
- Plasma Circulating mRNA Profile for the Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer Using NanoString Technologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the diagnostic ability of blood markers for colorectal cancer (CRC). A systematic review of the literature for diagnostic blood markers for primary human colorectal cancer over the last 5 years was performed. The primary outcome was to assess the diagnostic ability of these markers in diagnosing colorectal cancer. The secondary outcome was to see whether the marker was compared to other markers. The tertiary outcome was to assess diagnostic ability in early versus late CRC, including stage IV disease. We identified 51 studies (29 prospective, 14 retrospective, and 8 meta-analyses). The markers were divided in broadly four groups: nucleic acids (RNA/DNA/messenger RNA/microRNAs), cytokines, antibodies, and proteins. The most promising circulating markers identified among the nucleid acids were NEAT_v2 non-coding RNA, SDC2 methylated DNA, and SEPT9 methylated DNA. The most promising cytokine to detect CRC was interleukin 8, and the most promising circulating proteins were CA11-19 glycoprotein and DC-SIGN/DC-SIGNR. Sensitivities of these markers for detecting primary colorectal carcinoma ranged from 70 to 98% and specificities from 84 to 98.7%. The best studied blood marker was SEPT9 methylated DNA, which showed great variability with sensitivities ranging from 48.2 to 95.6% and specificities from 80 to 98.9%, making its clinical applicability challenging. If combined with fecal immunochemical test (FIT), the sensitivity improved from 78 to 94% in detecting CRC. Methylated SEPT9, methylated SDC2, and -SIGN/DC-SIGNR protein had better sensitivity and specificity than CEA or CA 19-9. With the exception of SEPT9 which is currently being implemented as a screening test for CRC all other markers lacked reproducibility and standardization and were studied in relatively small population samples.
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.