Trial reportOncology research2025
Trial report in Oncology research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Colorectal adenomatous polyps frequently recur after removal and are precursors to colorectal cancer, highlighting the need for effective preventive strategies. This study evaluated the efficacy of probiotic Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-blind, two-year crossover trial in patients with a history of adenomatous polyps. Participants received CBM588 in either the first or second year, with the alternate year as observation, and underwent annual surveillance colonoscopies. Outcomes (adenoma recurrence and polyp counts) were analyzed by intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) approaches. Results: A total of 398 participants were enrolled. In first-year ITT analysis, the CBM588-first group had a lower mean polyp count (0.78 vs. 1.00) and lower adenoma recurrence rate (30.00% vs. 35.35%) than the control-first group, though these differences were not statistically significant ( Conclusion: CBM588 demonstrated potential to reduce colorectal adenoma recurrence in high-risk patients, supporting its role as a feasible, non-invasive preventive strategy.
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.