Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35380164›Full record

SynthesisClinical and experimental immunology2022

Antibodies as biomarkers for cancer risk: a systematic review.

Maria J Monroy-Iglesias, Silvia Crescioli, Kerri Beckmann, Nga Le, Sophia N Karagiannis, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, Aida Santaolalla

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Humoral contributions to checkpoint blockade therapy.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

Maria J Monroy-IglesiasTranslational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Centre for Cancer, Society, and Public Health, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Silvia CrescioliSt. John's Institute of Dermatology, School of Basic & Medical Biosciences, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Kerri BeckmannHigher Degree by Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Nga LeHigher Degree by Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Sophia N KaragiannisSt. John's Institute of Dermatology, School of Basic & Medical Biosciences, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4100-7810
Mieke Van HemelrijckTranslational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Centre for Cancer, Society, and Public Health, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Aida SantaolallaTranslational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Centre for Cancer, Society, and Public Health, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2417-3275

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/L023091/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing evidence has linked the humoral immune response with the development of various cancers. Therefore, there is growing interest in investigating the predictive value of antibodies to assess overall and tissue site-specific cancer risk. Given the large amount of antibody types and the broad scope of the search (i.e. cancer risk), the primary aim of this systematic review was to present an overview of the most researched antibodies (i.e. immunoglobulin (Ig) isotypes (IgG, IgM, IgA, and IgE), tumour and self-antigen-reactive antibodies, infection-related antibodies) in relation to overall and site-specific cancer risk. We identified various antibody types that have been associated with the risk of cancer. While no significant associations were found for IgM serum levels, studies found an inconsistent association among IgE, IgA, and IgG serum levels in relation to cancer risk. When evaluating antibodies against infectious agents, most studies reported a positive link with specific cancers known to be associated with the specific agent recognized by serum antibodies (i.e. helicobacter pylori and gastric cancer, hepatitis B virus and hepatocellular carcinoma, and human papillomavirus and cervical cancer). Several reports identified autoantibodies, as single biomarkers (e.g. anti-p53, anti-MUC1, and anti-CA125) but especially in panels of multiple autoantibodies, to have potential as diagnostic biomarkers for specific cancer types. Overall, there is emerging evidence associating certain antibodies to cancer risk, especially immunoglobulin isotypes, tumour-associated antigen-specific, and self-reactive antibodies. Further experimental studies are necessary to assess the efficacy of specific antibodies as markers for the early diagnosis of cancer.

Indexed as

Immunoglobulin ANeoplasmsAutoantibodiesBiomarkersEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansImmunoglobulin EImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MAutoantibodiesBiomarkersImmunoglobulin AImmunoglobulin EImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin Mantibodiesbiomarkerscancerearly detectionimmunoglobulintumor -associated antigens

Identifiers

PMID35380164
PMCPMC9307228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.