Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40302859›Full record

ReviewJournal of the anus, rectum and colon2025

Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: Clinical Implications of Genomic Medicine and Precision Oncology.

Atsushi Yamada, Tomohiro Kondo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the anus, rectum and colon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Atsushi YamadaDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan.
Tomohiro KondoDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately 10% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases occur in the context of hereditary cancer-predisposing conditions caused by germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes, with Lynch syndrome and familial adenomatous polyposis at the top of the list. Although the identification of hereditary CRC has traditionally relied on clinical characteristics, including familial accumulation, multiple and early onset of CRC and other related cancers, and the presence of gastrointestinal polyposis, more comprehensive approaches, such as universal tumor screening and universal germline testing, have recently been employed. From a technical standpoint, next-generation sequencing has enabled genome-wide analysis of genetic alterations in germline and somatic settings. Taking advantage of this technology, germline multigene panel testing has been utilized in genetic testing, which leads to the identification of PVs, not only in well-known hereditary CRC genes but also in rare causal genes, moderate-risk genes, and high-risk genes previously not linked to CRC predisposition. In addition, comprehensive genomic profiling and companion diagnostics for solid tumors occasionally yield unexpected hereditary CRC diagnoses. Thus, more hereditary CRCs have been identified not based on clinical phenotypes but rather by comprehensive approaches or as secondary findings of treatment drug testing. In this review, we discuss the impact of recent advances in genomic medicine on the clinical aspects of hereditary CRC, which has promoted an understanding of the entire landscape of genetic predisposition to CRC.

Indexed as

comprehensive genomic profilinggenomic medicinehereditary colorectal cancermultigene panel testinguniversal germline testinguniversal tumor screening

Identifiers

PMID40302859
PMCPMC12035340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.