Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23674872›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013

Prognostic and survival analysis of 837 Chinese colorectal cancer patients.

Ying Yuan, Mo-Dan Li, Han-Guang Hu, Cai-Xia Dong, Jia-Qi Chen, Xiao-Fen Li, Jing-Jing Li, Hong Shen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Survival Rate of Colorectal Cancer in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ying YuanDepartment of Medical Oncology, 2 Hospital of Zhejiang University College of Medicine, Hangzhou 310009, Zhejiang Province, China.
Mo-Dan Li
Han-Guang Hu
Cai-Xia Dong
Jia-Qi Chen
Xiao-Fen Li
Jing-Jing Li
Hong Shen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo develop a prognostic model to predict survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

methodsSurvival data of 837 CRC patients undergoing surgery between 1996 and 2006 were collected and analyzed by univariate analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression model to reveal the prognostic factors for CRC. All data were recorded using a standard data form and analyzed using SPSS version 18.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, United States). Survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The log rank test was used to assess differences in survival. Univariate hazard ratios and significant and independent predictors of disease-specific survival and were identified by Cox proportional hazard analysis. The stepwise procedure was set to a threshold of 0.05. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

resultsThe survival rate was 74% at 3 years and 68% at 5 years. The results of univariate analysis suggested age, preoperative obstruction, serum carcinoembryonic antigen level at diagnosis, status of resection, tumor size, histological grade, pathological type, lymphovascular invasion, invasion of adjacent organs, and tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging were positive prognostic factors (P < 0.05). Lymph node ratio (LNR) was also a strong prognostic factor in stage III CRC (P < 0.0001). We divided 341 stage III patients into three groups according to LNR values (LNR1, LNR ≤ 0.33, n = 211; LNR2, LNR 0.34-0.66, n = 76; and LNR3, LNR ≥ 0.67, n = 54). Univariate analysis showed a significant statistical difference in 3-year survival among these groups: LNR1, 73%; LNR2, 55%; and LNR3, 42% (P < 0.0001). The multivariate analysis results showed that histological grade, depth of bowel wall invasion, and number of metastatic lymph nodes were the most important prognostic factors for CRC if we did not consider the interaction of the TNM staging system (P < 0.05). When the TNM staging was taken into account, histological grade lost its statistical significance, while the specific TNM staging system showed a statistically significant difference (P < 0.0001).

conclusionThe overall survival of CRC patients has improved between 1996 and 2006. LNR is a powerful factor for estimating the survival of stage III CRC patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAsian PeopleChinaColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingColorectal cancerCox proportional hazard regressionLymph node ratioPrognostic factors

Identifiers

PMID23674872
PMCPMC3645383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.