ArticleScientific reports2025
Dysregulation of bile acid metabolism in patients with colorectal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Bile acid signaling in health and disease.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Review
- Advances in research on the effects of bile acids and their receptors on intestinal function.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Gut Check: Lactobacillus johnsonii Harnesses Bile Acids and Reactive Oxygen Species to Suppress High-Fat Diet-Induced Colorectal Cancer.Cancer research · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bile acid (BA) metabolism and signaling may influence cancer risk. We investigated differences in circulating BA composition between healthy controls and patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and assessed the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in CRC cell lines exposed to chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA). BA, C4, and fibroblast growth factor-19 (FGF19) concentrations in serum samples from 70 controls and 133 patients with CRC were analyzed. Results showed that primary and secondary BAs, C4, and FGF19 were significantly lower in CRC patients than in the age- and sex- matched controls (P < 0.05). CDCA reduced the percentage of EdU-positive cells in HCT116 and HT-29 cells by 53.6% and 28.3%, respectively (P < 0.001) and decreased the rate of wound closure by 0.31 ± 0.05- and 0.30 ± 0.06-fold in HCT116 and HT-29 cells, respectively(P < 0.05). It significantly reduced spheroid formation by 90.0% and 94.3% in HCT116 and HT-29 cells, respectively (P < 0.0001) and downregulated EMT-related stem cell markers in CRC cells. The dysregulation of BA synthesis and recycling might contribute to CRC carcinogenesis. CDCA might alter EMT, protecting against CRC development and progression. The predictive role of plasma BAs in CRC prognosis and their potential in CRC prevention and management should be further explored.
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.