Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24642618›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2014

Prognostic impact of genomic instability in colorectal cancer.

T S Hveem, M A Merok, M E Pretorius, M Novelli, M S Bævre, O H Sjo, N Clinch, K Liestøl, A Svindland, R A Lothe and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Tumour-infiltrating CD8British journal of cancer · 2019
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cancers · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Context is everything: aneuploidy in cancer.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Prognostic markers for colorectal cancer: estimating ploidy and stroma.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2018
    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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T S Hveem1] Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [3] Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1080 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway.
M A Merok1] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Department of Cancer Prevention, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4953 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [3] Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 1171 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway.
M E Pretorius1] Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
M Novelli1] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Department of Pathology, University College Hospital, London WC1E 6JJ, UK.
M S Bævre1] Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
O H SjoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
N ClinchInstitute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
K Liestøl1] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1080 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway.
A Svindland1] Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 1171 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway [2] Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
R A Lothe1] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Department of Cancer Prevention, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4953 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [3] Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 1171 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway.
A Nesbakken1] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 1171 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway [3] Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway.
H E Danielsen1] Institute for Cancer Genetics and Informatics, Oslo University Hospital, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [2] Centre for Cancer Biomedicine, University of Oslo, PO Box 4950 Nydalen, 0424 Oslo, Norway [3] Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1080 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway [4] Nuffield Division of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
University of Oslo · NOOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prognostic impact of an indication of chromosomal instability (CIN) is evaluated in a consecutive series of 952 colorectal cancer patients treated at Aker University Hospital, Norway, during 1993-2003. Microsatellite instability (MSI) in this case series has recently been reported and made it possible to find the co-occurrence and compare the prognostic significance of CIN and MSI.

methodsData sets for overall survival (OS; n=855) and time to recurrence (TTR; n=579) were studied. To reveal CIN we used automated image cytometry (ICM). Non-diploid histograms were taken as indicative of the presence of CIN. PCR-based measures of MSI in this material have already been described.

resultsAs with MSI, CIN was found to be an independent predictor of early relapse and death among stage II patients (TTR: n=278: HR 2.19 (95% CI: 1.35-3.55), P=0.002). Of the MSI tumours (16%), 71% were found to be DNA diploid, 21% were DNA tetraploid and 8% were DNA aneuploid. Among microsatellite stable tumours, 24% were DNA diploid, 15% were DNA tetraploid and 61% were DNA aneuploid.

conclusionFor patients presenting with stage II disease, genomic instability as detected by DNA image cytometry has the potential to provide a useful biomarker for relapse and cancer-related death following surgery with curative intent.

Indexed as

Microsatellite InstabilityPrognosisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAneuploidyColorectal NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalDNA, NeoplasmFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingDNA, Neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID24642618
PMCPMC3992498
OpenAlexW2112112966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.