ReviewTargeted oncology2017
What We Know About Stage II and III Colon Cancer: It's Still Not Enough.
Review in Targeted oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of CDX2 in the prognosis of colorectal cancer across stages 0-IV.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Prognosis in stage II colorectal cancer: the effect of the primary tumor location and biomarkers-a retrospective cohort study.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Bayesian multi-study non-negative matrix factorization for mutational signatures.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Development of a risk prediction model for personalized assessment of postoperative recurrence risk in colon cancer patients.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Prediction of overall survival in stage II and III colon cancer through machine learning of rapidly-acquired proteomics.Cell discovery · 2024Article
- Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Genomics and Biomarkers with Focus on Local Therapies.Cancers · 2023Review
- Putative anoikis resistant subpopulations are enriched in lymph node metastases and indicate adverse prognosis in colorectal carcinoma.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2022Article
- Review
- Oncotype DX testing does not affect clinical practice in stage IIa colon cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2022Article
- Sustainable Clinical Development of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Review
- PD-L1 as a Prognostic Factor in Early-Stage Colon Carcinoma within the Immunohistochemical Molecular Subtype Classification.Cancers · 2021Article
- The Impact of KRAS Mutation on the Presentation and Prognosis of Non-Metastatic Colon Cancer: an Analysis from the National Cancer Database.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- Establishment and validation of a novel nomogram incorporating clinicopathological parameters into the TNM staging system to predict prognosis for stage II colorectal cancer.Cancer cell international · 2020Article
- Expression ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Identification of key pathways and genes in colorectal cancer to predict the prognosis based on mRNA interaction network.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Combination of CDX2 expression and T stage improves prognostic prediction of colorectal cancer.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Article
- Pharmacogenomics in colorectal cancer: current role in clinical practice and future perspectives.Journal of cancer metastasis and treatment · 2018Article
- Colorectal cancer: epigenetic alterations and their clinical implications.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Reviews on cancer · 2017Review
- NOTUM Is Involved in the Progression of Colorectal Cancer.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The introduction of oxaliplatin as adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer in 2004 has been the last practice changing progress in adjuvant treatment for patients with early colon cancer. Since then, many prognostic and predictive biomarkers have been studied, but only DNA mismatch repair status has been validated as having an important prognostic value. Accordingly, TNM and clinical-pathological patterns, such as pT4 lesions and lymph node sampling <12 nodes, are the main factors that guide physicians' choice regarding adjuvant treatment. More recently, many biomarkers showed promising results: POLE, ErbB2, CDX2, SMAD4, BRAF and KRAS. In addition to these, immune-contexture, molecular classification, and gene signatures could become new ways to better classify colon cancer patients with more discriminatory power than TNM. The aim of this review is to report the state-of-the-art of prognostic and predictive factors in the adjuvant setting and which of these could modify clinical practice and maybe replace TNM classification.
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.