Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29116438›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018

Staging with computed tomography of patients with colon cancer.

M L Malmstrøm, S Brisling, T W Klausen, A Săftoiu, T Perner, P Vilmann, I Gögenur

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

M L MalmstrømDepartment of Surgery, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark. malmstroem@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3484-1903
S BrislingDepartment of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Roskilde, Denmark.
T W KlausenDepartment of Hematology, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark.
A SăftoiuResearch Centre of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Craiova, Romania.
T PernerDepartment of Radiology, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Roskilde, Denmark.
P VilmannDepartment of Surgery, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark.
I GögenurDepartment of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Køge, Denmark.

Funding

Agnes and Poul Friis Fund 1208008Arvid Nilssons Fund 1073808Axel Muusfeldts Fund 10202-0 3-382Dansk Medicinsk Selskab 02084064Director Jacob Madsens and wife Olga Madsens Fund 5447Director Svend Espersens Fund 8976 MT/IVFru Astrid Thaysens Legat for Lægevidenskabelig Grundforskning 502099-001Harboefonden 15183Krista and Viggo Petersens Fund 5793/48 B/gbmResearch Council of Køge Hospital 2375909 14-000122HE
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAccurate staging of colonic cancer is important for patient stratification. We aimed to correlate the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative computed tomography (CT) with final histopathology as reference standard.

methodsData was collected retrospectively on 615 consecutive patients operated for colonic cancer. Evaluation was based upon T-stage. Patients were stratified into high-risk and low-risk groups, based on the extent of tumor invasion beyond the proper muscle layer of more or less than 5 mm. The Kendall tau correlation coefficient was used to calculate concordance between radiological (r)T-stage obtained at CT imaging and pathological (p)T-stage from the final pathology.

resultsIn total, 501 patients were included. We found no significant differences in the Kendall tau values for diagnostic measures between the groups at the 95% confidence interval (CI) level: 49% (95% CI, 43-55) for all individuals, 48% (95% CI, 40-56) for screened individuals, and 47% (95% CI, 37-56) for non-screened individuals. The overall sensitivity and specificity for all individuals in identifying high-risk tumors on CT was 65% (95% CI, 56-73) and 89% (95% CI, 85-92). The risk of ending up in the high-risk group due to overstaging among all individuals was calculated as the number needed to harm 11.7 (95% CI, 9-16).

conclusionsThere is basis for improvement of CT-based preoperative staging of patients with colorectal cancer. Supplementary modalities may be needed for correct staging of patients preoperatively, especially in relation to stratification of patients into neoadjuvant treatments or tailored therapy in patients with early cancers.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedColonic NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm StagingPatient SelectionSensitivity and SpecificityColon cancerComputed tomographyStaging

Identifiers

PMID29116438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.