SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Meta-analysis of the prognostic value of CpG island methylator phenotype in rectal cancer.
Synthesis 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rectal Cancer: Exploring Predictive Biomarkers Through Molecular Pathways Involved in Carcinogenesis.Biology · 2024Review
- Serrated Colorectal Lesions: An Up-to-Date Review from Histological Pattern to Molecular Pathogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- [Epidural block associated with improved long-term survival after surgery for colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe pathological and prognostic importance of CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in rectal cancer, as a sub-population of colorectal cancer, is unknown. A meta-analysis was preformed to estimate the prognostic significance of CIMP in rectal cancer.
methodsA systematic search was performed of PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Cochrane electronic databases for articles pertaining to CIMP and rectal cancer. Articles were analysed and data extracted according to PRISMA standards.
resultsSix studies including 1529 patients were included in the analysis. Following dichotomisation, the prevalence of CIMP-positive tumours was 10 to 57%, with a median of 12.5%. Meta-analysis demonstrated the pooled odds ratio for all-cause death for CIMP-positive tumours vs CIMP-negative tumours was 1.24 (95% CI 0.88-1.74). Z test for overall effect was 1.21 (p = 0.23). Heterogeneity between the studies was low (X
conclusionsNo significant association between CIMP and poor outcomes in rectal cancer was demonstrated. There was a high degree of heterogeneity in CIMP assessment methodologies and in study populations. Rectal cancer datasets were frequently not extractable from larger colorectal cohorts, limiting analysis.
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.