ReviewWorld journal of surgery2013
A nodal positivity constant: new perspectives in lymph node evaluation and colorectal cancer.
Review in World journal of surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lymph node stain after radical resection of rectal cancer mainly increased the harvest of mini lymph node: A randomized controlled trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Trial
- Prognostic and predictive value of examined lymph node count in stage III colorectal cancer: a population based study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Lymph node regression grading of locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Review
- Long-term outcomes after extra-levator versus conventional abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessing the adequacy of lymph node yield for different tumor stages of colon cancer by nodal staging scores.BMC cancer · 2017Article
- Population-based study to re-evaluate optimal lymph node yield in colonic cancer.The British journal of surgery · 2017Article
- Article
- Ex Vivo Intra-arterial Methylene Blue Injection in Rectal Cancer Specimens Increases the Lymph-Node Harvest, Especially After Preoperative Radiation.World journal of surgery · 2016Article
- Stage migration vs immunology: The lymph node count story in colon cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
- Management of nodal disease from colon cancer in the laparoscopic era.International journal of colorectal disease · 2015Review
- Extended lymphadenectomy in colon cancer is crucial.World journal of surgery · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo date, associations between the number of lymph nodes evaluated, staging, and survival have been examined in the context of large population-based studies conducted by a small number of investigators. Therefore, although high-quality data are available, perspective is lacking.
methodsStudies for this paper were identified by searches of Medline, Scopus, PubMed, and manual searching of references from articles, using the search terms ''colorectal cancer'', ''nodal status'' and ''lymph node''.
resultsIt is clear that survival benefit increases with the increasing number of lymph nodes harvested. Despite this observation, there has been no significant increase in the proportion of node-positive cancers over the past two decades.
conclusionThe nodal positivity rate for colorectal cancer consistently approximates 40 % across a wide range of studies internationally, a phenomenon that has not previously been recognized in the literature. We review the evidence and introduce the concept of a nodal positivity constant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23242459What 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.