ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2016
Impact of age on the prognostic value of number of lymph nodes retrieved in patients with stage II colorectal cancer.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lymph node harvest as a predictor of survival for colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgery in practice and science · 2023Review
- Stage II colon cancer staging using the number of retrieved lymph nodes may be superior to current TNM staging for prognosis stratification: the Japanese study group for postoperative follow-up of colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA small number of lymph nodes retrieved (NLNR) is a known risk factor in stage II colorectal cancer. NLNR is influenced by age, but little is known about whether the impact of small NLNR on survival differs with age. This retrospective study sought to determine such impact in elderly patients with stage II colorectal cancer.
methodsWe reviewed data for 2100 patients with stage II colorectal cancer who underwent surgery without adjuvant chemotherapy between January 1997 and December 2003. The optimal cutoff value of NLNR for survival was determined, and the impact of small NLNR on survival was analyzed. The association between age and NLNR was evaluated. The relation between age and risk of small NLNR with respect to survival was then assessed to determine the impact of small NLNR on elderly patients' survival.
resultsThe optimal cutoff value of NLNR was determined as 6. The small NLNR group (SNG) showed significantly worse prognosis than the large NLNR group (LNG) (p < 0.001). Age, surgical method, and scope of lymph node dissection were significantly associated with NLNR. A potential interaction was noted between age and risk of small NLNR in relation to relapse-free survival (RFS). Five-year RFS was significantly worse in SNG than in LNG for elderly patients (41.7 and 76.4 %, respectively; p < 0.001) but not for non-elderly patients (75.9 and 84.6 %, respectively; p = 0.083).
conclusionsNLNR <6 was identified to be an important prognostic factor for elderly patients with stage II colorectal cancer.
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.