ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2017
T1 colon cancer in the era of screening: risk factors and treatment.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Weighing the benefits of lymphadenectomy in early-stage colorectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Review
- Predictors of lymph-node metastasis in surgically resected T1 colorectal cancer in Western populations.Gastroenterology report · 2021Article
- Clinical Impact and Prognostic Role of KRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA Mutations in Stage I Colorectal Cancer.Disease markers · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
37 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to identify risk factors for lymph node positivity in T1 colon cancer and to carry out a surgical quality assurance audit.
methodsThe sample consisted of consecutive patients treated for early-stage colon lesions in 15 colorectal referral centres between 2011 and 2014. The study investigated 38 factors grouped into four categories: demographic information, preoperative data, indications for surgery and post-operative data. A univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the significance of each factor both in terms of lymph node (LN) harvesting and LN metastases.
resultsOut of 507 patients enrolled, 394 patients were considered for analysis. Thirty-five (8.91%) patients had positive LN. Statistically significant differences related to total LN harvesting were found in relation to central vessel ligation and segmental resections. Cumulative distribution demonstrated that the rate of positive LN increased starting at 12 LN harvested and reached a plateau at 25 LN.
conclusionsSome factors associated with an increase in detection of positive LN were identified. However, further studies are needed to identify more sensitive markers and avoid surgical overtreatment. There is a need to raise the minimum LN count and to use the LN count as an indicator of surgical quality.
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.