Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35181895›Full record

SynthesisAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2022

Systematic review: non-endoscopic surveillance for colorectal neoplasia in individuals with Lynch syndrome.

Elsa L S A van Liere, Nanne K H de Boer, Evelien Dekker, Monique E van Leerdam, Tim G J de Meij, Dewkoemar Ramsoekh

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Elsa L S A van LiereDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, AGEM Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4826-3443
Nanne K H de BoerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, AGEM Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Evelien DekkerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Monique E van LeerdamDepartment of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tim G J de MeijDepartment of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dewkoemar RamsoekhDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDutch Cancer Society · NLEmma Kinderziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals with Lynch syndrome are at high risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). Regular colonoscopies have proven to decrease CRC incidence and mortality. However, colonoscopy is burdensome and interval CRCs still occur. Hence, an accurate, less-invasive screening method that guides the timing of colonoscopy would be of important value.

aimTo outline the performance of non-endoscopic screening modalities for Lynch-associated CRC and adenomas.

methodsSystematic literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies investigating imaging techniques and biomarkers for detection of CRC and adenomas in Lynch syndrome. The QUADAS-2 tool was used for the quality assessment of included studies.

resultsSeven of 1332 screened articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two studies evaluated either CT colonography or MR colonography; both techniques were unable to detect CRC and (advanced) adenomas <10 mm. The other five studies evaluated plasma methylated-SEPTIN9, faecal immunochemical test (FIT), faecal tumour DNA markers (BAT-26, hMLH1, p53, D9S171, APC, D9S162, IFNA and DCC) and faecal microbiome as screening modalities. Sensitivity for CRC varied from 33% (BAT-26) to 70% (methylated-SEPTIN9) to 91% (hMLH1). High specificity (94-100%) for CRC and/or adenomas was observed for methylated-SEPTIN9, FIT and BAT-26. Desulfovibrio was enriched in the stool of patients having adenomas. However, all these studies were characterised by small populations, high/unclear risk of bias and/or low prevalence of adenomas.

conclusionsImaging techniques are unsuitable for colon surveillance in Lynch syndrome, whereas biomarkers are understudied. Having outlined biomarker research in Lynch-associated and sporadic CRC/adenomas, we believe that these non-invasive markers may hold potential (whether or not combined) for this population. As they could be of great value, (pre-)clinical studies in this field should be prioritised.

Indexed as

AdenomaColorectal NeoplasmsColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisBiomarkers, TumorColonoscopyEarly Detection of CancerHumansOccult BloodBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID35181895
PMCPMC9303645
OpenAlexW4212824539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.