Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31771043›Full record

ArticleCancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers2020

Biomarkers Apo10 and TKTL1: Epitope-detection in monocytes (EDIM) as a new diagnostic approach for cholangiocellular, pancreatic and colorectal carcinoma.

S Saman, M J Stagno, S W Warmann, N P Malek, R R Plentz, E Schmid

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S SamanMedical Clinic, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
M J StagnoDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Urology, Children's Hospital, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
S W WarmannDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Urology, Children's Hospital, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
N P MalekMedical Clinic, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
R R PlentzMedical Clinic, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
E SchmidDepartment of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Urology, Children's Hospital, Eberhard-Karls-University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
University Children's Hospital Tübingen · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DEKlinikum Bremen-Mitte · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe EDIM (Epitope detection in monocytes) blood test is based on two biomarkers Apo10 and TKTL1. Apo10 is responsible for cell proliferation and resistance to apoptosis. TKTL1 plays a major role in anaerobic glycolysis of tumor cells, leading to destruction of the basal membrane and metastasis as well as in controlling cell cycle. For the first time we analyzed Apo10 and TKLT1 in patients with cholangiocellular (CCC), pancreatic (PC), and colorectal carcinoma (CRC).

methodsBlood samples of 62 patients with CCC, PC, and CRC were measured and compared to 29 control patients. We also investigated 13 patients with inflammatory conditions, because elevated TKTL1 and Apo10 have been previously described in affected individuals. Flow cytometry was used to detect surface antigens CD14+/CD16+ (activated monocytes/macrophages). Percentages of macrophages harboring TKTL1 and Apo10 were determined. A combined EDIM score (EDIM-CS: TKTL1 plus Apo10) was calculated. Results were correlated with serum tumor markers CEA and CA19-9.

resultsPatients with CCC had 100% positive EDIM-CS but CEA and CA19-9 were positive in only 22.2% and 70%, respectively. Patients with PC had 100% positive EDIM-CS but positive tumor markers in only 37.5% (CEA) and 72.7% (CA19-9). Patients with CRC had 100% positive EDIM-CS but only 50% positive CEA. EDIM-CS was positive in 100% (62/62) of all cancer patients and in 0% of healthy individuals. Of the individuals with inflammation, 7.7% had a positive EDIM-CS.

conclusionThe sensitivity of the EDIM blood test and the comparison with traditional tumor markers indicate that this new test might improve the detection of carcinomas (CCC, PC and, CRC) and might be relevant for the diagnosis of all tumor entities.

Indexed as

AgedBiomarkers, TumorCA-19-9 AntigenCarcinoembryonic AntigenCholangiocarcinomaColorectal NeoplasmsEpitopesFemaleFlow CytometryHumansIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMacrophagesMaleMiddle AgedMonocytesPancreatic NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCA-19-9 AntigenCarcinoembryonic AntigenEpitopesIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsTKTL1 protein, humanTransketolaseApo10biologic biopsyBiomarkercholangiocellular carcinomacolorectal carcinomaEDIM blood testpancreas cancerPanTum detectTKTL1

Identifiers

PMID31771043
PMCPMC7029314
OpenAlexW2991637126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.