ArticleBiomarkers in cancer2018
A Combinatorial Proteomic Biomarker Assay to Detect Ovarian Cancer in Women.
Article in Biomarkers in cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serum Biomarker Based Algorithms in Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer: A Review.Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ovarian cancer is often fatal and incidence in the general population is low, underscoring the necessity (and the challenges) for advancements in screening and early detection. The goal of this study was to design a serum-based biomarker panel and corresponding multivariate algorithm that can be used to accurately detect ovarian cancer. A combinatorial protein biomarker assay (CPBA) that uses CA125, HE4, and 3 tumor-associated autoantibodies resulted in an area under the curve of 0.98. The CPBA Ov algorithm was trained using subjects who were suspected to have gynecological cancer and were scheduled for surgery. As a surgical rule-out test, the clinical performance achieves 100% sensitivity and 83.7% specificity. Although sample size (n = 60) is a limiting factor, the CPBA Ov algorithm performed better than either CA-125 alone or the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm.
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.