ArticleUpdates in surgery2012
Application of Petersen Index score for Dukes'B colorectal cancer in a population of 103 consecutive resected patients.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dukes' B colorectal cancer (CRC) represents a wide spectrum of disease from early penetration through the bowel wall to aggressive and extensive tumours with extramural venous spread and involvement of the serosa, surgical margins or adjacent organs. Among Dukes' B cancers, Petersen Index allows stratification to identify those patients whom chemotherapy may benefit. One hundred and three resected patients with CRC Dukes' B were included prospectively in a database and considered in the present study. According to Petersen Index, a score (from 0 to 4) for each patient was calculated on the basis of peritoneal and margin involvement, venous invasion and tumour perforation. Twenty-four out of 103 tumours were located in the rectum and 79 in the colon. According to PI score 59 patients had a score of 0, 30 of 1 and 14 of ≥2. The overall R0 resection was achieved in 95.1 % of cases and the majority of patients with PI score of ≥2 were R1-2. The mean of harvested lymph nodes was 23.6 (±10.7) with no difference according to the PI score. Patients in the high-risk group had a worse 5-year survival rate (66.3 %) compared with the other group (P < 0.009). Multivariate analysis validated the PI score as a significant independent factor (P = 0.017). Both high-quality pathology and adequate harvested lymph nodes are needed for a proper staging. Even though the influence of PI score on survival is confirmed as it leads to an additional rate of colorectal cancer being considered for adjuvant therapy, we underline that a comparison with additional clinical and histological prognostic factors should be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22460519What 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.