ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2024
Prognostic and diagnostic value of circulating IGFBP2 in pancreatic cancer.
Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2024. 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.
- Rewiring the tumor microenvironment: IGFBP2 at the Nexus of remodeling and therapy resistance?Biochimica et biophysica acta. Reviews on cancer · 2026Review
- Pathologic Signaling and Disease Implications of Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Proteins in Cancer, Cardiovascular Disease, and Fibrosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Integrated multi-omics profiling to establish an IGFBP-based prognostic score for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: unraveling prognostic biomarkers, immune microenvironment crosstalk, and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2) is overexpressed in tumor tissues of several malignancies, including pancreatic cancer. Because of its role in tumor progression, IGFBP2 has been investigated as a tumor biomarker. However, little is known about its utility in pancreatic cancer. Plasma IGFBP2 levels were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 75 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), 73 matched healthy controls, and 17 chronic pancreatitis patients. Our results showed that the plasma IGFPB2 level was significantly higher in PDAC patients than in patients with chronic pancreatitis and healthy controls. At a cut-off value of 333.9 ng/mL, the specificity and sensitivity were 78.08 and 65.33%, respectively. IGFBP2 level alone did not outperform carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) in diagnostic accuracy, but it successfully identified 9 out of 24 PDAC patients who were misidentified by CA19-9. The combination of IGFBP2 and CA19-9 was more accurate in the detection of PDAC than CA19-9 alone. IGFBP2 was more accurate than the other in discriminating between chronic pancreatitis and PDAC. Plasma IGFBP2, rather than CA19-9, was higher in the new-onset diabetes, lymph node involvement, and distant metastasis subgroups. IGFBP2 level was notably higher in stage IV cases than in stage I/II or stage III disease. However, CA19-9 did not show a difference between stages. After adjusting for lymph node involvement and distant metastasis, plasma IGFBP2 was identified as an independent prognostic marker for PDAC. The median survival time for patients with an IGFBP2 level ≥333.9 ng/mL was significantly shorter than that for patients with an IGFBP2 level <333.9 ng/mL. Marked elevation of plasma IGFBP2 in PDAC is associated with poorer survival. IGFBP2 may be considered as a supplementary biomarker for the diagnosis and prognostic prediction in Chinese pancreatic cancer patients.
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.