ArticlePloS one2016
Characteristics of Differently Located Colorectal Cancers Support Proximal and Distal Classification: A Population-Based Study of 57,847 Patients.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of PD-L1 expression in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of PD-L1 expression in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Whole Tumor Heterogeneity Topography (WTHT)-A New Approach for Assessment of Intratumor Mutational Heterogeneity in Colorectal Adenomas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Investigation of a methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 circulating tumour DNA blood test for monitoring treatment response in patients with colorectal cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Epidemiology of colonic adenoma and cancer.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Prognosis in stage II colorectal cancer: the effect of the primary tumor location and biomarkers-a retrospective cohort study.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Meat Consumption in Relation to Colorectal Cancer Incidence in Anatomical Subsites in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Calcium Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Relationship between inherited genetic variation and survival from colorectal cancer stratified by tumour location.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Malignant Colon Polyps-Is Tumor Laterality the New Black?Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- The Role of Tumor Location on Endoscopic and Surgical Management of Malignant Colon Polyps.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Dysbiosis promotes recurrence of adenomatous polyps in the distal colorectum.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Prognostic factors and survival disparities in right-sided versus left-sided colon cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Biological and Clinical Characteristics of Proximal Colon Cancer: Far from Its Anatomical Subsite.International journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
- Identifying important microbial and genomic biomarkers for differentiating right- versus left-sided colorectal cancer using random forest models.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- A Belgian Population-Based Study Reveals Subgroups of Right-sided Colorectal Cancer with a Better Prognosis Compared to Left-sided Cancer.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Left-Sided Colon Cancer and Right-Sided Colon Cancer: Are They the Same Cancer or Two Different Entities?Cureus · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt has been suggested that colorectal cancer be regarded as several subgroups defined according to tumor location rather than as a single entity. The current study aimed to identify the most useful method for grouping colorectal cancer by tumor location according to both baseline and survival characteristics.
methodsCases of pathologically confirmed colorectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2000 to 2012 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and categorized into three groups: right colon cancer (RCC), left colon cancer (LCC), and rectal cancer (ReC). Adjusted hazard ratios for known predictors of disease-specific survival (DSS) in colorectal cancer were obtained using a Cox proportional hazards regression model.
resultsThe study included 57847 patients: 43.5% with RCC, 37.7% with LCC, and 18.8% with ReC. Compared with LCC and ReC, RCC was more likely to affect old patients and women, and to be at advanced stage, poorly differentiated or un-differentiated, and mucinous. Patients with LCC or ReC had better DSS than those with RCC in subgroups including stage III or IV disease, age ≤70 years and non-mucinous adenocarcinoma. Conversely, patients with LCC or ReC had worse DSS than those with RCC in subgroups including age ˃70 years and mucinous adenocarcinoma.
conclusionsRCC differed from both LCC and ReC in several clinicopathologic characteristics and in DSS. It seems reasonable to group colorectal cancer into right-sided (i.e., proximal) and left-sided (i.e., distal) ones.
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.