Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 191

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison between universal molecular screening for Lynch syndrome and revised Bethesda guidelines in a large population-based cohort of patients with colorectal cancer

Open access
Pérez-Carbonell, Lucía, Ruiz-Ponte, Clara, Guarinos, Carla, Alenda, Cristina, Payá, Artemio, Brea, Alejandro, Egoavil, Cecilia M, Castillejo, Adela, Barberá, Victor M, Bessa, Xavier, Xicola, Rosa M, Rodríguez-Soler, María, Sánchez-Fortún, Cristina, Acame, Nuria, Castellví-Bel, Sergi, Piñol, Virgínia, Balaguer, Francesc, Bujanda, Luis, De-Castro, María-Luisa, Llor, Xavier, Andreu, Montserrat, Carracedo, Angel, Soto, José-Luis, Castells, Antoni, Jover, Rodrigo·2012·Gut

Abstract

Background: The selection of patients for genetic testing to rule out Lynch syndrome is currently based on fulfilment of at least one of the revised Bethesda criteria followed by mismatch repair (MMR) status analysis. A study was undertaken to compare the present approach with universal MMR study-based strategies to detect Lynch syndrome in a large series of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: 2093 patients with CRC from the EPICOLON I and II cohorts were included. Immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins and/or microsatellite instability (MSI) analysis was performed in tumour tissue. Germline MLH1 and MSH2 mutation analysis was performed in patients whose tumours showed loss of MLH1 or MSH2 staining, respectively. MSH6 genetic testing was done in patients whose tumours showed lack of MSH6 expression or a combined lack of MSH2 and MSH6 expression but did not have MSH2 mutations. PMS2 genetic testing was performed in patients showing isolated loss of PMS2 expression. In patients with MSI tumours and normal or not available MMR protein expression, all four MMR genes were studied. Results: A total of 180 patients (8.6%) showed loss of expression of some of the MMR proteins and/or MSI. Four hundred and eighty-six patients (23.2%) met some of the revised Bethesda criteria. Of the 14 (0.7%) patients who had a MMR gene mutation, 12 fulfilled at least one of the revised Bethesda criteria and two (14.3%) did not. Conclusions: Routine molecular screening of patients with CRC for Lynch syndrome using immunohistochemistry or MSI has better sensitivity for detecting mutation carriers than the Bethesda guidelines.

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 · 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300041

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 191

Metadata

Authors
Pérez-Carbonell, L., Ruiz-Ponte, C., Guarinos, C., Alenda, C., Payá, A., Brea, A., Egoavil, C. M., Castillejo, A., Barberá, V. M., Bessa, X., Xicola, R. M., Rodríguez-Soler, M., Sánchez-Fortún, C., Acame, N., Castellví-Bel, S., Piñol, V., Balaguer, F., Bujanda, L., De-Castro, M.-L., Llor, X., Andreu, M., Carracedo, A., Soto, J.-L., Castells, A., & Jover, R.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2011-08-25
Volume
61
Issue
6
Pages
865-872
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2147517951
Cited by
191
References
3
FWCI
9.40
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: Comparison between universal molecular screening for Lynch syndrome and revised Bethesda guidelines in a large population-based cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300041
The paper
Pérez-Carbonell, L., Ruiz-Ponte, C., Guarinos, C., Alenda, C., Payá, A., Brea, A., Egoavil, C. M., Castillejo, A., Barberá, V. M., Bessa, X., Xicola, R. M., Rodríguez-Soler, M., Sánchez-Fortún, C., Acame, N., Castellví-Bel, S., Piñol, V., Balaguer, F., Bujanda, L., De-Castro, M.-L., . . . Jover, R. (2012). Comparison between universal molecular screening for Lynch syndrome and revised Bethesda guidelines in a large population-based cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300041

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.