ArticleBMC research notes2022
Identification of Streptococcus gallolyticus in tumor samples of Iranian patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer.
Article in BMC research notes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbiome and nutritional strategies in gastrointestinal cancers: Clinical implications and therapeutic perspectives.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Potential Pathogens Associated with Colorectal Cancer.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveClinical outcomes of infection by S. gallolyticus have not been investigated extensively. We aimed to determine the prevalence of S. gallolyticus in tumor specimens obtained from Iranian patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Polymerase chain reaction was used to confirm the presence of S. gallolyticus in patients' tissue samples.
resultsOf 176 patients, 65 were diagnosed with colorectal cancer whereas 111 did not have any colon disease. No correlation was found between age, colonization with S. gallolyticus, gender, or risk factors. Overall, 72 (40%) patients carried S. gallolyticus; only 29% of the patients without colorectal cancer were positive for S. gallolyticus. Diagnosis of colorectal cancer and presence of S. gallolyticus significantly correlated (P = 0.006; odds ratio = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.21-3.87). Among the patients with colorectal cancer, 39 (60%) were positive with S. gallolyticus (P = 0.006) whereas 33 of 111 (29.7%) control subjects were positive for S. gallolyticus (P > 0.05); thus, 70.3% of the control subjects were not infected with S. gallolyticus. We found a high prevalence of S. gallolyticus among an Iranian cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. Despite previous reports, we report a positive correlation between colorectal cancer and S. gallolyticus colonization.
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.