Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40741185›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of clinical oncology2025

Early detection of gallbladder cancer: Current status and future perspectives.

Yajnadatta Sarangi, Ashok Kumar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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.

Yajnadatta SarangiDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow 226014, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Ashok KumarDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow 226014, Uttar Pradesh, India. doc.ashokgupta@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gall bladder cancer (GBC) remains a highly aggressive disease, with an overall 5-year dismal survival rate of 15%-20%. Its asymptomatic nature in very early stages and non-specific clinical presentations pose significant challenges to timely detection. Consequently, GBC often presents late, making it one of the most challenging cancers to manage. Surgery offers the best chance for long-term survival; however, only 10% of GBC patients are candidates for upfront resection, with the majority presenting in locally advanced or metastatic stages. Furthermore, GBC is generally resistant to chemotherapy and radiotherapy, limiting the effectiveness of systemic therapy. Therefore, early diagnosis is crucial to offer the best treatment through surgical resection and to improve the outcome. Recent advancements in imaging technologies, biomarker discovery, and molecular diagnostics offer promising avenues for enhancing detection rates. Though non-invasive, most of them lack specificity, and the majority fail as an early diagnostic tool. This review examines the current status of early detection strategies for GBC, addresses the limitations of existing approaches, and explores the newer emerging diagnostic tools and techniques and how they can be exploited in future for its early detection.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBiomarkersEarly diagnosisGall bladder cancerHigh risk factorsLiquid biopsyRadiology

Identifiers

PMID40741185
PMCPMC12304979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.