SynthesisCancer medicine2019
Fecal Fusobacterium nucleatum for the diagnosis of colorectal tumor: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Oral-Gut Microbiome Connection in Patients with Periodontitis: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- The presence and relative abundance of salivary Fusobacterium nucleatum are not associated with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Fecal Fusobacterium nucleatum for the diagnosis of colorectal tumor: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical applications of gut microbiome for non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Microbiota-metabolite axis in endometriosis: Pathogenic mechanisms and clinical implications.Journal of biomedical research · 2026Article
- Pathogenic Roles ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Microbe-driven immune suppression in colorectal cancer: theFrontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Tumor-Promoting Gut Microbes in Colorectal Cancer: Mechanisms and Translational Perspectives.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
- State of omics-based microbial diagnostics of CRC.Gut microbes · 2025Review
- Fusobacterium Nucleatum in Colorectal Cancer: Relationship Among Immune Modulation, Potential Biomarkers and Therapeutic Implications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Gut Microbiome and colorectal cancer: discovery of bacterial changes with metagenomics application in Turkısh population.Genes & genomics · 2024Article
- Parvimonas micra can translocate from the subgingival sulcus of the human oral cavity to colorectal adenocarcinoma.Molecular oncology · 2024Article
- Gut Bacteria Provide Genetic and Molecular Reporter Systems to Identify Specific Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Mechanisms by which the intestinal microbiota affects gastrointestinal tumours and therapeutic effects.Molecular biomedicine · 2023Review
- Correlation of gut microbiota with leukopenia after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer.BMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Gut microbiota bridges the iron homeostasis and host health.Science China. Life sciences · 2023Review
- Progress of gut microbiome and its metabolomics in early screening of colorectal cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023Review
- Improved diagnosis of colorectal cancer using combined biomarkers including Fusobacterium nucleatum, fecal occult blood, transferrin, CEA, CA19-9, gender, and age.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Implication of Obesity and Gut Microbiome Dysbiosis in the Etiology of Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The fecal Fusobacterium nucleatum has been reported as a potential noninvasive biomarker for colorectal tumor in several studies, but its exact diagnostic accuracy was ambiguous due to the wide range of sensitivity and specificity. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of fecal F. nucleatum for colorectal tumor, we searched electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, without any date and language restrictions. Two reviewers independently extracted data and appraised study quality with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. We included ten studies comprising 13 cohorts for colorectal cancer (CRC) and seven cohorts for colorectal adenoma (CRA). A total of 1450 patients and 1421 controls for CRC and 656 patients and 827 controls for CRA were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of fecal F. nucleatum for CRC were 71% (95% CI, 61%-79%) and 76% (95% CI, 66%-84%), with the area under the receiver-operating characteristics (AUC) curve of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.76-0.83). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of fecal F. nucleatum for CRA were 36% (95% CI, 27%-46%) and 73% (95% CI, 65%-79%), with an AUC of 0.60 (95% CI, 0.56-0.65). Substantial heterogeneity among studies existed, which was partly caused by DNA extraction kits, regions of study, sample size, and demographic characteristics of participants. Fecal F. nucleatum was valuable for the diagnosis of CRC although it performed below expectation. For CRA, the specificity of fecal F. nucleatum indicated the possibility of noninvasive screening. Subgroup analyses for adenoma were incomplete due to lack of data. Heterogeneity limited the credibility of the study.
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.