ReviewBJC reports2024
Protein prognostic biomarkers in stage II colorectal cancer: implications for post-operative management.
Review in BJC reports, 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.
- A brief review of Lynch syndrome: understanding the dual cancer risk between endometrial and colorectal cancer.Oncology reviews · 2025Review
- Article
- High WTAP expression level as a promising biomarker for poor prognosis in colorectal cancer: a pilot study.European journal of histochemistry : EJH · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a significant threat to many human lives worldwide and survival following resection is predominantly stage dependent. For early-stage cancer, patients are not routinely advised to undergo additional post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy. Acceptable clinical management guidelines are well established for patients in pTNM stages I, III and IV. However, recommendations for managing CRC stage II patients remain controversial and many studies have been conducted to segregate stage II patients into low- and high-risk of recurrence using genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic molecular markers. As proteins provide valuable insights into cellular functions and disease state and have a relatively easy translation to the clinic, this review aims to discuss potential prognostic protein biomarkers proposed for predicting tumour relapse in early-stage II CRC. It is suggested that a panel of markers may be more effective than a single marker and further evaluation is required to translate these into clinical practice.
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.