Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Detecting Colorectal Cancer in Stool With the Use of Multiple Genetic Targets

Dong, S. M., Traverso, G., Johnson, C., Geng, L., Favis, R., Boynton, K., Hibi, K., Goodman, S. N., D'Allessio, M., Paty, P., Hamilton, S. R., Sidransky, D., Barany, F., Levin, B., Shuber, A., Kinzler, K. W., Vogelstein, B., Jen, J.·2001·JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer cells are shed into the stool, providing a potential means for the early detection of the disease using noninvasive approaches. Our goal was to develop reliable, specific molecular genetic tests for the detection of colorectal cancer in stool samples. METHODS: Stool DNA was isolated from paired stools and primary tumor samples from 51 colorectal cancer patients. Three genetic targets-TP53, BAT26, and K-RAS-were used to detect tumor-associated mutations in the stool prior to or without regard to the molecular analyses of the paired tumors. TP53 gene mutations were detected with a mismatch-ligation assay that detects nine common p53 gene mutations. Deletions within the BAT26 locus were detected by a modified solid-phase minisequencing method. Mutations in codons 12 and 13 of K-RAS were detected with a digital polymerase chain reaction-based method. RESULTS: TP53 gene mutations were detected in the tumor DNA of 30 patients, all of whom had the identical TP53 mutation in their stools. Tumors from three patients contained a noninherited deletion at the BAT26 locus, and the same alterations were identified in these patients' stool specimens. Nineteen of 50 tumors tested had a K-RAS mutation; identical mutations were detected in the paired stool DNA samples from eight patients. In no case was a mutation found in stool that was not also present in the primary tumor. Thus, the three genetic markers together detected 36 (71%) of 51 patients (95% confidence interval [CI] = 56% to 83%) with colorectal cancer and 36 (92%) of 39 patients (95% CI = 79% to 98%) whose tumors had an alteration. CONCLUSION: We were able to detect the majority of colorectal cancers by analyzing stool DNA for just three genetic markers. Additional work is needed to determine the specificity of these genetic tests for detecting colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic patients and to more precisely estimate the prevalence of the mutations and sensitivity of the assay.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jnci/93.11.858

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Dong, S. M., Traverso, G., Johnson, C., Geng, L., Favis, R., Boynton, K., Hibi, K., Goodman, S. N., D'Allessio, M., Paty, P., Hamilton, S. R., Sidransky, D., Barany, F., Levin, B., Shuber, A., Kinzler, K. W., Vogelstein, B., & Jen, J.
Venue
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
2001-06-06
Volume
93
Issue
11
Pages
858-865
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2123244768
Cited by
337
References
30
FWCI
14.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Detecting Colorectal Cancer in Stool With the Use of Multiple Genetic Targets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/93.11.858
The paper
Dong, S. M., Traverso, G., Johnson, C., Geng, L., Favis, R., Boynton, K., Hibi, K., Goodman, S. N., D'Allessio, M., Paty, P., Hamilton, S. R., Sidransky, D., Barany, F., Levin, B., Shuber, A., Kinzler, K. W., Vogelstein, B., & Jen, J. (2001). Detecting Colorectal Cancer in Stool With the Use of Multiple Genetic Targets. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/93.11.858

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.