ArticlePloS one2021
Targeted next-generation sequencing-based detection of microsatellite instability in colorectal carcinomas.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance assessment of computational tools to detect microsatellite instability.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Article
- DNA Damage Repair Pathways in Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review of Molecular Mechanisms, Emerging Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Precision Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Microsatellite instability assessment is instrumental for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine: status quo and outlook.The EPMA journal · 2023Review
- Challenges and Therapeutic Opportunities in the dMMR/MSI-H Colorectal Cancer Landscape.Cancers · 2023Review
- MEM: An Algorithm for the Reliable Detection of Microsatellite Instability (MSI) on a Small NGS Panel in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, we developed a computational method and panel markers to assess microsatellite instability (MSI) using a targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) platform and compared the performance of our computational method, mSILICO, with that of mSINGS to detect MSI in CRCs. We evaluated 13 CRC cell lines, 84 fresh and 119 formalin-fixed CRC tissues (including 61 MSI-high CRCs and 155 microsatellite-stable CRCs) and tested the classification performance of the two methods on 23, 230, and 3,154 microsatellite markers. For the fresh tissue and cell line samples, mSILICO showed a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 100%, regardless of the number of panel markers, whereas for the formalin-fixed tissue samples, mSILICO exhibited a sensitivity of up to 100% and a specificity of up to 100% with three differently sized panels ranging from 23 to 3154. These results were similar to those of mSINGS. With the application of mSILICO, the small panel of 23 markers had a sensitivity of ≥95% and a specificity of 100% in cell lines/fresh tissues and formalin-fixed tissues of CRC. In conclusion, we developed a new computational method and microsatellite marker panels for the determination of MSI that does not require paired normal tissues. A small panel could be integrated into the targeted NGS panel for the concurrent analysis of single nucleotide variations and MSI.
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.