ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2015
Colorectal cancer screening and prevention in women.
Review in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficient and accurate framework for genome-wide gene-environment interaction analysis in large-scale biobanks.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Role of Vitamin D Receptor (BsmI-VDR) and Insulin Receptor (NsiI-A/G) Gene Polymorphisms in Colorectal Adenoma Susceptibility.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Trends in colorectal cancer surgical resection rates during the screening era: a retrospective study in Italy.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Male-Biased Gut Microbiome and Metabolites Aggravate Colorectal Cancer Development.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Thirty-two-year trends of cancer incidence by sex and cancer site in the Veneto Region from 1987 to 2019.Frontiers in public health · 2023Observational
- Article
- Survival and long-term surgical outcomes after colorectal surgery: are there any gender-related differences?Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Do difficulties in emotional processing predict procedure pain and shape the patient's colonoscopy experience?BMJ open · 2022Observational
- Impact of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias on colorectal cancer screening utilization, knowledge, and associated health disparities.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Overtreatment in nonmalignant lesions detected in a colorectal cancer screening program: a retrospective cohort study.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Association of Colonic Diverticula with Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening Modality Among Newly Age-Eligible Medicaid Enrollees.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
- A review of sex-related differences in colorectal cancer incidence, screening uptake, routes to diagnosis, cancer stage and survival in the UK.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Time Trends of Gastrointestinal Cancers Incidence and Mortality in Yangzhong From 1991 to 2015: An Updated Age-Period-Cohort Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Article
- Multilevel predictors of colorectal cancer testing modality among publicly and privately insured people turning 50.Preventive medicine reports · 2017Article
- Fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening: The gender dilemma.United European gastroenterology journal · 2017Article
- Toward the Elimination of Colorectal Cancer Disparities Among African Americans.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2016Article
- Oncogene Mutations in Colorectal Polyps Identified in the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Prevention (NORCCAP) Screening Study.Clinical medicine insights. Pathology · 2016Article
- Clinical Practice Patterns Suggest Female Patients Prefer Female Endoscopists.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2015Article
- Preoperative Neutrophil-BMI Ratio As a Promising New Marker for Predicting Tumor Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading cancers and cause of cancer deaths in American women and men. Females and males share a similar lifetime cumulative risk of CRC however, substantial differences in risk factors, tumor biology, and effectiveness of cancer prevention services have been observed between them. This review distills the evidence documenting the unique variation observed between the genders relating to CRC risk factors, screening and prevention. Consistent evidence throughout the world demonstrates that women reach equivalent levels of adenomas and CRC as men but it occurs nearly a decade later in life than in their male counterparts. Women have a higher proportion of tumors which are hypermethylated, have microsatellite instability and located in the proximal colon suggesting the serrated pathway may be of greater consequence in them than in men. Other CRC risk factors such as smoking, diet and obesity have been shown to have disparate effects on women which may related to interactions between estrogen exposure, body fat distribution, and the biologic underpinnings of their tumors. There is data showing the uptake, choice, and efficacy of different CRC screening methods in women is dissimilar to that in men. The mortality benefit from FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, and protection from interval CRC by colonoscopy appears to be lower in women than men. A greater understanding of these gender idiosyncrasies will facilitate an personalized approach to CRC prevention and should ultimately lead to a reduced burden of disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.