Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33333293›Full record

ReviewMolecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy2021

Novel Genetic and Epigenetic Biomarkers of Prognostic and Predictive Significance in Stage II/III Colorectal Cancer.

Xiao-Jing Luo, Qi Zhao, Jia Liu, Jia-Bo Zheng, Miao-Zhen Qiu, Huai-Qiang Ju, Rui-Hua Xu

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

92 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Association ofGenetics research · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiao-Jing LuoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Qi ZhaoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Jia LiuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Jia-Bo ZhengState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Miao-Zhen QiuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Huai-Qiang JuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China.
Rui-Hua XuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, P.R. China. Electronic address: xurh@sysucc.org.cn.
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The therapeutic strategies of stage II/III colorectal cancer (CRC) patients after curative surgery remain controversial. In the clinical decision-making process, oncologists need to answer questions such as whether adjuvant chemotherapy is necessary or which therapeutic regimen should be given to each patient. At present, whether adjuvant chemotherapy should be applied is primarily based on histopathological features and clinical risk factors. However, only a fraction of patients can benefit from it. More rigorous stratifying biomarkers are urgently needed to help further distinguishing these populations of patients. Recent progress in next-generation sequencing and high-throughput technologies has greatly promoted biomarker discovery as well as our understanding of the underlying mechanisms in CRC. Novel genetic and epigenetic biomarkers that are associated with prognosis or therapeutic responses have emerged. In this review, we discuss the strategies of biomarker discovery and summarize the status and assess the utility of previously published biomarkers in CRC.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorEpigenesis, GeneticAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy, AdjuvantColorectal NeoplasmsGenomicsHumansNeoplasm StagingPrognosisTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, TumorbiomarkercircRNAcolorectal cancerepigeneticgenomiclncRNAmiRNAnon-coding RNApredictiveprognostictranscriptomic

Identifiers

PMID33333293
PMCPMC7854353
OpenAlexW3110971778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.