ArticleJournal of translational medicine2024
A proteomic classifier panel for early screening of colorectal cancer: a case control study.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel plasma protein signatures for early diagnosis and prognostic stratification in colorectal cancer.iScience · 2026Article
- Identification of IL1RN, MUC1, and SERPINA1 as key NET-related biomarkers in ulcerative colitis-associated intestinal fibrosis via bioinformatics and experimental validation.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Noninvasive diagnosis of colorectal adenoma: The emerging potential of blood-based biomarkers.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Carnosine Dipeptidase(Cndp): An emerging therapeutic target for metabolic diseases and cancers.Genes & diseases · 2026Review
- Navigating the molecular landscape: integrated multiomics liquid biopsy for biomarker discovery in early detection and monitoring of colorectal cancer.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
- Autophagy related biomarkers in ulcerative colitis revealed by bioinformatics analysis and immune correlation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Circulating proteins and metabolites panel for noninvasive preoperative diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Advances in Precision Medicine Approaches for Colorectal Cancer: From Molecular Profiling to Targeted Therapies.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) during early stages can greatly improve patient outcome. Although technical advances in the field of genomics and proteomics have identified a number of candidate biomarkers for non-invasive screening and diagnosis, developing more sensitive and specific methods with improved cost-effectiveness and patient compliance has tremendous potential to help combat the disease.
methodsWe enrolled three cohorts of 479 subjects, including 226 CRC cases, 197 healthy controls, and 56 advanced precancerous lesions (APC). In the discovery cohort, we used quantitative mass spectrometry to measure the expression profile of plasma proteins and applied machine-learning to select candidate proteins. We then developed a targeted mass spectrometry assay to measure plasma concentrations of seven proteins and a logistic regression classifier to distinguish CRC from healthy subjects. The classifier was further validated using two independent cohorts.
resultsThe seven-protein panel consisted of leucine rich alpha-2-glycoprotein 1 (LRG1), complement C9 (C9), insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2), carnosine dipeptidase 1 (CNDP1), inter-alpha-trypsin inhibitor heavy chain 3 (ITIH3), serpin family A member 1 (SERPINA1), and alpha-1-acid glycoprotein 1 (ORM1). The panel classified CRC and healthy subjects with high accuracy, since the area under curve (AUC) of the training and testing cohort reached 0.954 and 0.958. The AUC of the two independent validation cohorts was 0.905 and 0.909. In one validation cohort, the panel had an overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 89.9%, 81.8%, 89.2%, and 82.9%, respectively. In another blinded validation cohort, the panel classified CRC from healthy subjects with a sensitivity of 81.5%, specificity of 97.9%, and overall accuracy of 92.0%. Finally, the panel was able to detect APC with a sensitivity of 49%.
conclusionsThis seven-protein classifier is a clear improvement compared to previously published blood-based protein biomarkers for detecting early-stage CRC, and is of translational potential to develop into a clinically useful assay.
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.