ArticleScientific reports2023
CXCL5 and CXCL14, but not CXCL16 as potential biomarkers of colorectal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytokines and Chemokines as Emerging Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Colorectal Cancer-Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Cancer screening: recent developments and future directions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Novel Approach to Staging and Detection of Colorectal Cancer in Early Stages.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Experts emphasize that colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing. That is why its early detection is of the utmost importance. Patients with cancer diagnosed in earlier stages have a better prognosis and a chance for faster implementation of treatment. Consequently, it is vital to search for new parameters that could be useful in its diagnosis. Therefore, we evaluated the usefulness of CXCL5, CXCL14 and CXCL16 in serum of 115 participants (75 CRC patients and 40 healthy volunteers). Concentrations of all parameters were measured using Luminex. CRP (C-reactive protein) levels were determined by immunoturbidimetry, while levels of classical tumor markers were measured using CMIA (Chemiluminescence Microparticle Immunoassay). Concentrations of CXCL5 were statistically higher in the CRC group when compared to healthy controls. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) of CXCL5 and CXCL14 were higher than those of CA 19-9. Obtained results suggest the usefulness of CXCL5 and CXCL16 in the determination of distant metastases and differentiation between TNM (Tumor-Node-Metastasis) stages, as well as the usefulness of CXCL14 and CRP combination in CRC detection (primary or recurrence). However, further studies concerning their role in CRC progression are crucial to confirm and explain their diagnostic utility and clinical application as biomarkers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.