Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29341159›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of surgery2018

Clinicopathological, genomic and immunological factors in colorectal cancer prognosis.

K M Marks, N P West, E Morris, P Quirke

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K M MarksSection of Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
N P WestSection of Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
E MorrisSection of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1075-6544
P QuirkeSection of Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
University of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous factors affect the prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC), many of which have long been identified, such as patient demographics and the multidisciplinary team. In more recent years, molecular and immunological biomarkers have been shown to have a significant influence on patient outcomes. Whilst some of these biomarkers still require ongoing validation, if proven to be worthwhile they may change our understanding and future management of CRC. The aim of this review was to identify the key prognosticators of CRC, including new molecular and immunological biomarkers, and outline how these might fit into the whole wider context for patients.

methodsRelevant references were identified through keyword searches of PubMed and Embase Ovid SP databases.

resultsIn recent years there have been numerous studies outlining molecular markers of prognosis in CRC. In particular, the Immunoscore® has been shown to hold strong prognostic value. Other molecular biomarkers are useful in guiding treatment decisions, such as mutation testing of genes in the epidermal growth factor receptor pathway. However, epidemiological studies continue to show that patient demographics are fundamental in predicting outcomes.

conclusionCurrent strategies for managing CRC are strongly dependent on clinicopathological staging, although molecular testing is increasingly being implemented into routine clinical practice. As immunological biomarkers are further validated, their testing may also become routine. To obtain clinically useful information from new biomarkers, it is important to implement them into a model that includes all underlying fundamental factors, as this will enable the best possible outcomes and deliver true precision medicine.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleGenomicsHumansImmunologic FactorsMaleMutationPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorImmunologic Factors

Identifiers

PMID29341159
PMCPMC7938848
OpenAlexW2784918301

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.