ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2016
Has the 'Fast-Track' referral system affected the route of presentation and/or clinical outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer?
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age-stratified colonoscopy outcomes and referral-factor associations in the Swedish colorectal cancer fast-track pathway: a retrospective cohort study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Pan-cancer predictive survival model development and evaluation using electronic health record and genetic data across 10 cancer types.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Exhaled volatile organic compounds in the detection of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EXCLI journal · 2024Review
- Relationship between time from symptom's onset to diagnosis and prognosis in patients with symptomatic colorectal cancer.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Symptoms and signs of colorectal cancer, with differences between proximal and distal colon cancer: a prospective cohort study of diagnostic accuracy in primary care.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Straight-to-test for the two-week-wait colorectal cancer pathway under the updated NICE guidelines reduces time to cancer diagnosis and treatment.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2019Article
- Factors Associated with Prolonged Patient-Attributable Delay in the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer.Cancer research and treatment · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to determine whether the 'Fast-Track' referral system has changed the route by which patients present with colorectal cancer (CRC) and whether the route of presentation has any effect on clinical outcome.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with CRC under the care of two consultant colorectal surgeons between April 2006 and December 2012. The route by which patients presented was categorised as Fast-Track (FT), non-Fast-Track (non-FT) or acute. Outcome variables were operative intent, disease stage and 2- and 5-year survival.
resultsA total of 558 patients were identified. One hundred ninety-seven patients (35.3 %) were referred as FT, 108 (19.4 %) presented acutely and 253 patients (45.3 %) presented via other routes (non-FT). Over the study period, the route of presentation did not change significantly (P = 0.135). There was no significant difference between FT and non-FT groups in terms of the proportion of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery (70.6 vs 74.3 %, P = 0.092) or with node-negative disease (48.2 vs 52.2 %, P = 0.796) nor was there any difference in 2-year or 5-year survival (74.1 vs 73.9 %, P = 0.837 and 52.3 vs 53.8 %, P = 0.889, respectively). Patients who presented acutely were less likely to undergo curative resection, had more advanced disease and had worse 2- and 5-year survival.
conclusionsThe Fast-Track referral system has not affected the route by which patients present with CRC nor has it had any effect on clinical outcomes. Alternative strategies are required if the desired improvement in outcomes is to be achieved.
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.