ReviewVisceral medicine2016
Diagnostics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer.
Review in Visceral medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
89 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 220 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prognostic value of immunoscore in patients with colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2019Pooled it
- A Hybrid Lightweight Deep Learning Framework for Colorectal Cancer Detection Using an Adaptive Gated Feature Fusion and Grid Search-Based Hyperparameter Optimization.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Cannabis as a source of novel therapeutics: A computational study combining LBDD and structure-based docking/dynamics to identify novel drug-like compounds for colorectal cancer.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Evaluating clinicopathological pattern and management of colorectal cancer for adult patients presenting at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital: a 10-year retrospective review.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Investigating predictive factors of participation in colorectal cancer screening based on the Preventive Health Model (PHM) and health literacy.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in Metal-based Nanotechnology-based Optical Therapy for the Targeted Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.Anti-cancer agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- Emerging risk factors and the role of gut microbiota in immunomodulation and therapeutic implications in colorectal cancer.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2026Review
- Molecular Basis, Diagnostic Approaches, and Therapeutic Strategies in Colorectal Cancer-Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
- Flavonoids and Flavonoid-Based Nanopharmaceuticals as Promising Therapeutic Strategies for Colorectal Cancer-An Updated Literature Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Pre-diagnostic Demographic, Lifestyle, and Health History Factors in Association with Secreted Protein Acidic and Rich in Cysteine (SPARC) Expression in Colorectal Cancer Tissue.Biomarker insights · 2025Article
- Cheminformatics-based screening and evaluation of phytochemicals as CDK2 inhibitors in colorectal cancer therapy.PloS one · 2025Article
- Establishing core data elements for colorectal cancer and mapping to FHIR resources: Towards interoperable Iranian health information systems.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Correlating Ultrastructural Changes in the Invasion Area of Colorectal Cancer with CT and MRI Imaging.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- LightCF-Net: A Lightweight Long-Range Context Fusion Network for Real-Time Polyp Segmentation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Molecular interaction and MD-simulations: investigation of Sizofiran as a promising anti-cancer agent targeting eIF4E in colorectal cancer.In silico pharmacology · 2024Article
- Focusing on colorectal cancer in young adults (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Diagnostic significance of CD10 marker to differentiate colorectal adenocarcinoma from adenomatous polyp: A pathological correlation.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Impact of Various Risk Factors on the Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test for Colorectal Cancer in the Iranian Population.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2023Article
29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Main risk factors include advanced age, family history, male sex, and lifestyle factors. Screening can reduce incidence and death from colorectal cancer. Therefore, prevention and early detection are crucial in order to detect and remove pre-neoplastic adenomas and to detect cancers at early stages. Colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and fecal occult blood tests are established tools for screening. Newer fecal immunochemical tests reveal higher sensitivities for advanced adenoma and cancer than guaiac-based hemoccult tests. Molecular stool and blood tests as well as virtual colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy are promising new developments so far not established as routine instruments for the prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer. Colonoscopy is the method of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and for adenoma removal. Prognosis is essentially dependent on the tumor stage at the time of the initial diagnosis. Proper staging based on imaging prior to therapy is a prerequisite. In rectal cancer, local staging is an essential requirement for the identification of appropriate candidates for neoadjuvant therapy.
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.