ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2015
Tumor deposit is a poor prognostic indicator in patients who underwent simultaneous resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- PET/MRI and PET/CT hybrid imaging of rectal cancer - description and initial observations from the RECTOPET (REctal Cancer trial on PET/MRI/CT) study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2019Trial
- Prognostic significance of tumor deposit counts in stage III colorectal cancer based on T/N staging and chemotherapy status: A retrospective cohort study.Surgery open science · 2025Article
- Comparative performance of multiple ensemble learning models for preoperative prediction of tumor deposits in rectal cancer based on MR imaging.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The potential role of tumor deposits in the prognosis and TNM staging for colorectal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Tumor Deposits as an Adverse Prognostic Indicator in Stage III Colon Cancer: A Multicenter Database Study.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024Article
- Performance of CT in the locoregional staging of colon cancer: detailed radiology-pathology correlation with special emphasis on tumor deposits, extramural venous invasion and T staging.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Negative prognostic impact of tumor deposits in stage III colorectal cancer patients.PloS one · 2024Article
- Multiregional-based magnetic resonance imaging radiomics model for predicting tumor deposits in resectable rectal cancer.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- Tumor deposits are associated with a higher risk of peritoneal disease in non-metastatic colorectal cancer patients.Journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Readjustment of nodal staging by integrating tumor deposits and positive lymph nodes in patients with stage III colon cancer: a population-based analysis.American journal of cancer research · 2023Article
- Neutrophil infiltration combined with necrosis in the primary tumor is a useful prognostic indicator for three-year disease-free survival time in patients with colorectal cancer.Oncology letters · 2022Article
- Predictive and Prognostic Assessment Models for Tumor Deposit in Colorectal Cancer Patients With No Distant Metastasis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- How Best to Play the Role of Tumor Deposits in Stage III Colon Cancer?Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The Prognostic Value of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colon Cancer With Solitary Tumor Deposit.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Beyond N staging in colorectal cancer: Current approaches and future perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in tissue material combined with systemic lymphocyte inflammation in patients with colorectal cancer.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Computed Tomography-Based Radiomics for Preoperative Prediction of Tumor Deposits in Rectal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic factor in peripheral whole blood samples of colorectal cancer patients.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- The Prognostic Significance of Tumor Deposit Count for Colorectal Cancer Patients after Radical Surgery.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2020Article
- Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in primary tumors of colorectal cancer and their metastases.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor deposits are one of the important influencing factors among the different editions of Tumor, Node, Metastasis classification. Incidence and prognosis of tumor deposits in stage I, II, and III colorectal cancer patients has been explored. The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of tumor deposits in stage IV colorectal cancer patients who underwent simultaneous resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM).
methodsClinicopathological and outcome data of 146 consecutive SCRLM patients who underwent simultaneous R0 resection between July 2003 and July 2013 were collected from our prospectively established SCRLM database. The prognostic value of tumor deposits was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.
resultsTumor deposits were detected in 41.8% (61/146) of these SCRLM patients. Tumor deposits were significantly correlated with lymph node metastasis and nerve invasion of the primary tumors (P=0.002, P=0.041; respectively). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of SCRLM patients with tumor deposits were significantly poorer than those with no tumor deposits (P=0.039, P=0.001; respectively). And with multivariate analysis, we found that positive tumor deposits were significantly associated with shorter DFS independent of lymph node status (P=0.002). Subgroup analysis found that of the 57 SCRLM patients with negative lymph node status, the OS and DFS of patients with positive tumor deposits were significantly shorter than those with negative tumor deposits (P=0.002 and P=0.031, respectively). Of the 89 patients with positive lymph node status, the OS of patients with tumor deposits was not significantly different than those without tumor deposits (P=0.965); however, the DFS of patients with tumor deposits was significantly shorter than those with no tumor deposits (P=0.034).
conclusionTumor deposits may be an independent adverse prognostic factor in SCRLM patients who underwent simultaneous R0 resection.
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.