ReviewHealth science reports2018
The practice of universal screening for Lynch syndrome in newly diagnosed endometrial carcinoma.
Review in Health science reports, 2018. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective assessment of barriers and access to genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes in an integrated health care delivery system.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Improved NGS-based detection of microsatellite instability using tumor-only data.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Diagnostics of Mutations in MMR/Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- The practice of universal screening for Lynch syndrome in newly diagnosed endometrial carcinoma.Health science reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLynch syndrome (LS) accounts for 5% of all endometrial cancer (EC) cases and 4% of all lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer. While current guidelines recommend LS screening for all patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer, there is no such guideline for screening patients with EC. DISCUSSION: This review addresses LS screening and discusses algorithms for testing patients in the setting of newly diagnosed EC.
conclusionThe successful diagnosis of LS has important implications, including prevention of LS-associated cancers among relatives and immunotherapy recommendations for patients with advanced EC and loss of expression of mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability positive following failure of traditional treatment.
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.