The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predictors of progression in Barrett's esophagus II: baseline 17p (p53) loss of heterozygosity identifies a patient subset at increased risk for neoplastic progression
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: Most patients with Barrett's esophagus do not progress to cancer, but those who do seem to have markedly increased survival when cancers are detected at an early stage. Most surveillance programs are based on histological assessment of dysplasia, but dysplasia is subject to observer variation and transient diagnoses of dysplasia increase the cost of medical care. We have previously validated flow cytometric increased 4N fractions and aneuploidy as predictors of progression to cancer in Barrett's esophagus. However, multiple somatic genetic lesions develop during neoplastic progression in Barrett's esophagus, and it is likely that a panel of objective biomarkers will be required to manage the cancer risk optimally. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated endoscopic biopsies from 325 patients with Barrett's esophagus, 269 of whom had one or more follow-up endoscopies, by a robust platform for loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analysis, using baseline 17p (p53) LOH as a predictor and increased 4N, aneuploidy, high-grade dysplasia, and esophageal adenocarcinoma as outcomes. RESULTS: The prevalence of 17p (p53) LOH at baseline increased from 6% in negative for dysplasia to 57% in high-grade dysplasia (p < 0.001). Patients with 17p (p53) LOH had increased rates of progression to cancer (relative risk [RR] = 16, p < 0.001), high-grade dysplasia (RR = 3.6, p = 0.02), increased 4N (RR = 6.1, p < 0.001), and aneuploidy (RR = 7.5, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with 17p (p53) LOH are at increased risk for progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma as well as high-grade dysplasia, increased 4N, and aneuploidy. 17p (p53) LOH is a predictor of progression in Barrett's esophagus that can be combined with a panel of other validated biomarkers for risk assessment as well as intermediate endpoints in prevention trials.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Nowell, P. C. (1976) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.959840 · Cited by 6,471
Gerdes, J., Lemke, H., Baisch, H., Wacker, H. H., Schwab, U., & Stein, H. (1984) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.133.4.1710 · Cited by 4,173
Mice without telomerase: what can they teach us about human cancer?
Artandi, S. E., & DePinho, R. A. (2000) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/78595 · Cited by 126
Cited by
Genomic copy number predicts esophageal cancer years before transformation
Killcoyne, S., Gregson, E., Wedge, D. C., Woodcock, D. J., Eldridge, M. D., de la Rue, R., Miremadi, A., Abbas, S., Blasko, A., Kosmidou, C., et al. (2020) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1033-y · Cited by 149
Britt-Compton, B., Rowson, J., Locke, M., Mackenzie, I., Kipling, D., & Baird, D. M. (2006) · Human Molecular Genetics · doi:10.1093/hmg/ddi486 · Cited by 114
Risk Factors for the Development of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in Barrett's Esophagus
de Jonge, P. J. F., Steyerberg, E. W., Kuipers, E. J., Honkoop, P., Wolters, L. M. M., Kerkhof, M., van Dekken, H., & Siersema, P. D. (2006) · The American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00626.x · Cited by 104
Metadata
- Authors
- Reid, B.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Gastroenterology
- Published
- 2001-10
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2839-2848
- ISSN
- 0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1985757925
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Predictors of progression in Barrett's esophagus II: baseline 17p (p53) loss of heterozygosity identifies a patient subset at increased risk for neoplastic progression. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)02798-8
- The paper
- Reid, B. (2001). Predictors of progression in Barrett's esophagus II: baseline 17p (p53) loss of heterozygosity identifies a patient subset at increased risk for neoplastic progression. The American Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)02798-8
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.