SynthesisBiomolecules & biomedicine2026
Fecal DNA SDC2 methylation test for colorectal cancer diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fecal DNA methylation of the syndecan-2 (SDC2) gene is being explored as a noninvasive biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection. However, its diagnostic performance necessitates thorough evaluation. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies investigating fecal SDC2 methylation (mSDC2) for CRC diagnosis. Eligible studies included adult CRC patients with histological confirmation and controls with either normal mucosa or benign colorectal lesions. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were synthesized using a Reitsma bivariate random-effects model, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves with corresponding area under the curve (AUC) values were derived from this hierarchical model. Twenty-five studies encompassing 3,427 CRC patients, 3,267 individuals with benign lesions, and 5,372 with normal mucosa were included. For the comparison of CRC versus normal mucosa (24 studies), the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.89; I² = 88%) and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.95; I² = 95%), respectively. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 81.73 (95% CI: 51.60-129.46), with an AUC of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93-0.97). In the comparison against benign lesions (22 studies), the sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.81-0.89; I² = 87%), specificity was 0.66 (95% CI: 0.59-0.71; I² = 91%), DOR was 11.10 (95% CI: 7.61-16.19), and AUC was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86). Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry tests indicated no statistically significant publication bias (p = 0.48 and 0.54). In conclusion, fecal mSDC2 testing demonstrates high diagnostic accuracy for CRC detection when compared to individuals with normal mucosa and moderate performance against benign colorectal lesions. These findings suggest that mSDC2 may serve as a promising noninvasive biomarker to complement existing CRC screening methodologies.
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.