ArticleThe oncologist2023
Mutation-Agnostic Detection of Colorectal Cancer Using Liquid Biopsy-Based Methylation-Specific Signatures.
Article in The oncologist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility and clinical effectiveness of liquid biopsy-based DNA methylation testing in early tumor screening and diagnosis, emphasizing older adult populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Pan-Cancer Detection Through DNA Methylation Profiling Using Enzymatic Conversion Library Preparation with Targeted Sequencing.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Agnostic Biomarkers and Molecular Signatures in Colorectal Cancer-Guiding Chemotherapy and Predicting Response.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- ctDNA Analysis in ERBB2-Amplified Colorectal Cancer: Biomarker Analysis of the MyPathway Trial.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025Article
- Improvement of the sensitivity of circulating tumor DNA-based liquid biopsy: current approaches and future perspectives.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2025Review
- Circulating tumor DNA methylation detection as biomarker and its application in tumor liquid biopsy: advances and challenges.MedComm · 2024Review
- Review
- Advances in blood DNA methylation-based assay for colorectal cancer early detection: a systematic updated review.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2024Review
- Types of Liquid Biopsies: Understanding the Different Lenses Through Which They Can Detect Cancer.The oncologist · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection of methylation patterns in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can offer a novel approach for cancer diagnostics given the unique signature for each tumor type. We developed a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based assay targeting 32 CpG sites to detect colorectal cancer-specific ctDNA. NGS was performed on bisulfite-converted libraries and status dichotomization was done using median methylation ratios at all targets. We included plasma samples from patients with metastatic colorectal (n = 20) and non-colorectal cancers (n = 8); and healthy volunteers (n = 4). Median methylation ratio was higher in colorectal cancer compared with non-colorectal cancers (P = .001) and normal donors (P = .005). The assay detected ctDNA in 85% of patients with colorectal cancer at a specificity of 92%. Notably, we were able to detect methylated ctDNA in 75% of patients in whom ctDNA was not detected by other methods. Detection of methylated ctDNA was associated with shorter median progression-free survival compared to non-detection (8 weeks versus 54 weeks; P = .027).
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.