Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35685992›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu2022

Establishment of an optimized CTC detection model consisting of EpCAM, MUC1 and WT1 in epithelial ovarian cancer and its correlation with clinical characteristics.

Tongxia Wang, Yan Gao, Xi Wang, Junrui Tian, Yuan Li, Bo Yu, Cuiyu Huang, Hui Li, Huamao Liang, David M Irwin and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Metastatic Melanoma: Liquid Biopsy as a New Precision Medicine Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Tongxia WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Yan GaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Xi WangDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Junrui TianDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Yuan LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Bo YuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Cuiyu HuangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Hui LiDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Huamao LiangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
David M IrwinDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto M5S1A8, Canada.
Huanran TanDepartment of Pharmacology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Hongyan GuoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Peking University · CNPeking University Third Hospital · CNUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Emerging studies have demonstrated the promising clinical value of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) for diagnosis, disease assessment, treatment monitoring and prognosis in epithelial ovarian cancer. However, the clinical application of CTC remains restricted due to diverse detection techniques with variable sensitivity and specificity and a lack of common standards. Methods: We enrolled 160 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer as the experimental group, and 90 patients including 50 patients with benign ovarian tumor and 40 healthy females as the control group. We enriched CTCs with immunomagnetic beads targeting two epithelial cell surface antigens (EpCAM and MUC1), and used multiple reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) detecting three markers (EpCAM, MUC1 and WT1) for quantification. And then we used a binary logistic regression analysis and focused on EpCAM, MUC1 and WT1 to establish an optimized CTC detection model. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the optimized model is 79.4% and 92.2%, respectively. The specificity of the CTC detection model is significantly higher than CA125 (92.2% Conclusions: Our study presents an optimized detection model for CTCs, which consists of the expression levels of three markers (EpCAM, MUC1 and WT1). In comparison with CA125, our model has high specificity and demonstrates better diagnostic values, especially for early-stage ovarian cancer. Detection of CTC

Indexed as

Circulating tumor cellsdiagnosis and prognosisepithelial ovarian canceroptimized detection model

Identifiers

PMID35685992
PMCPMC9086574
OpenAlexW4282917758

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.