ArticleJournal of clinical pathology1996
Chromosome 11q in sporadic colorectal carcinoma: patterns of allele loss and their significance for tumorigenesis.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- NXPE1 alters the sialoglycome by acetylating sialic acids in the human colon.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Genome-wide investigation of gene-environment interactions in colorectal cancer.Human genetics · 2013Article
- Detailed deletion mapping at chromosome 11q23 in colorectal carcinoma.British journal of cancer · 2000Article
- Article
- 11q23.1 and 11q25-qter YACs suppress tumour growth in vivo.Oncogene · 1999Article
- Localization of tumor suppressor activity important in nonsmall cell lung carcinoma on chromosome 11q.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1998Article
- Allele loss occurs frequently at hMLH1, but rarely at hMSH2, in sporadic colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability.British journal of cancer · 1996Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo analyse the frequency of loss of heterozygosity (allele loss, LOH) in a large sample of colorectal carcinomas using highly informative markers along chromosome 11q.
methodsOne hundred paired samples of colorectal cancer and normal tissue were genotyped at six microsatellite markers on chromosome 11q (cen-D11S1313-D11S901-DRD2/NCAM-D11S29- D11S968-tel). The high levels of heterozygosity at these markers allow allele loss to be determined in about 80% of cases at any one locus. The frequency of replication errors (RERs, microsatellite instability) has also been determined.
resultsLOH was found at frequencies of 25% and 29% at the distal D11S968 (11qter) and D11S29 (11q23.3) loci, slightly above the accepted baseline of 0-20%. Allele loss at NCAM, DRD2, D11S901, and D11S1313 was not raised above baseline levels. The probable genetic mechanism of allele loss--chromosomal non-disjunction, mitotic recombination, deletion, or gene conversion--seemed to vary between tumours and no consistent mechanism of mutation was found. Microsatellite instability was found in 23 (23%) tumours. No associations were found between LOH and clinical data (patient sex, age at presentation, tumour site, and Duke's stage).
conclusionsAlthough gene(s) on 11q may have a role in the development of a minority of colorectal carcinomas, this study provides evidence against the general importance of allele loss on chromosome 11q in the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer. The results also have implications for the importance of 11q in other cancers: it seems less likely that a single tumour supressor gene at this location promotes the growth of all types of tumour when lost. Rather, one or more genes with tissue specific effects may be involved.
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.