Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32606968›Full record

ReviewCancer management and research2020

Biochemical Markers of Colorectal Cancer - Present and Future.

Wojciech Jelski, Barbara Mroczko

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer management and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Wojciech JelskiDepartment of Biochemical Diagnostics, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1648-907X
Barbara MroczkoDepartment of Biochemical Diagnostics, Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to a report by the National Cancer Institute, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common types of cancer worldwide. CRC is often recognized too late for successful therapy. Tumor markers have been sought for a number of years to detect the transformation of malignant cells at the earliest possible stage. They are usually proteins associated with a malignancy and might be clinically useful in patients with cancer. Several classical markers have been used to recognize colorectal cancer, including carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA 19.9), tissue polypeptide specific antigen (TPS) and tumor-associated glycoprotein-72 (TAG-72). None of these tests, however, have excellent diagnostic accuracy. Recent studies have been conducted on the use of hematopoietic growth factors (HGFs) and various enzymes in the diagnosis and prognosis of colorectal cancer. These include macrophage-colony stimulating factor (M-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), interleukin-3, interleukin-6 and enzymes (alcohol dehydrogenase and lysosomal exoglycosidases). Significantly, most cancer deaths are not caused by the primary tumor itself but by its spread. Analysis of circulating cancer cells (CTCs), ie, factors responsible for metastasis, may be a source of information useful in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. Currently available markers have significant limitations.

Indexed as

colorectal cancertumor markers

Identifiers

PMID32606968
PMCPMC7319530

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.