ArticleGastro hep advances2022
Development and Clinical Validation of a Blood Test for Early Detection of Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer for Screening and Postpolypectomy Surveillance.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Blood-Based cfDNA/ctDNA Tests for Colorectal Cancer-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2026Review
- Human blood cell transcriptomics unveils dynamic systemic immune modulation along colorectal cancer progression.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2024Article
- Emerging Tests for Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: There is a lack of convenient, sensitive, noninvasive strategies for screening and surveillance for colorectal neoplasia. An assay combining the results of circulating epithelial cells (CECs) and somatic mutations of cell-free DNA adjusting for age/sex using a unique algorithm is evaluated in patients requiring colonoscopy. Methods: A prospective single-site 458-subject study (asymptomatic: 43% screening/43% surveillance, enriched with 65 symptomatic subjects undergoing colonoscopy) was conducted. The test analyzed CECs and somatic mutations. The probability of advanced neoplasia (advanced adenoma [AA] and CRCs) was determined by logistic regression methods adjusted for expected CRC incidence rate, prior history of AA, and patient age and sex on a training subset. A linear predictor was developed to generate a score scaled from 0 to 100. The test performance was evaluated on an independent set of subjects using prespecified algorithms and cut point. Results: Based on a predefined clinical threshold and predictive model derived from the training set (n = 232), analysis of an independent asymptomatic validation set (n = 194) yielded 89% (lower exact one-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 80%) specificity and 100% (95% CI: 37%)/78% (95% CI: 61%) sensitivity for detection of CRC/AA. In a secondary analysis, excluding surveillance subjects, the 97-subject screening cohort yielded 91% (95% CI: 79%) specificity and CRC/AA sensitivity at 100% (95% CI: 37%)/83% (95% CI: 56%, 87% for advanced neoplasia 95% CI: 64%). Significant associations ( Conclusion: A multimodal blood test that included CECs and somatic mutations with adjustment for age and sex demonstrated high sensitivity for the diagnosis of advanced colorectal neoplasia. The resulting score captures prognostic information for CRC progression of index adenoma size and number and has the potential to enable stratification of patients for screening or postpolypectomy surveillance colonoscopy.
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.