ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2019
CT colonography screening in extracolonic cancer survivors: impact on rates of colorectal and extracolonic findings by cancer type.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Extracolonic findings at CT colonography in an oncological hospital setting and why they matter.Clinical imaging · 2022Article
- A physician-scientist preceptorship in clinical and translational research enhances training and mentorship.BMC medical education · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the rates of colorectal and extracolonic findings at CT colonography (CTC) screening between patients with and without a personal prior history of other.
methodsOver a 160-month interval, 349 adults (mean age, 60.3 years; 67% female) with a positive history of extracolonic cancer [Ca(+)], excluding 271 patients with isolated non-melanoma skin cancers, underwent CTC screening. This study cohort was compared against 8859 controls (mean age, 57.0 years; 53% female) without a prior cancer history [Ca(-)]. Primary outcome measures included the rates of relevant colorectal (C-RADS C2-C4) and extracolonic (C-RADS E3-E4) findings at CTC. Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to test for statistical significance with post-hoc analysis by relative rate (RR).
resultsBoth colorectal (C2-C4) and extracolonic (E3-E4) findings were significantly increased in the Ca(+) group versus Ca(-) control group (p = 0.0283 and 0.0236, respectively). Positive colorectal findings were most notably increased among survivors of non-small cell lung cancer (RR 3.1), head/neck cancers (RR, 3.4), and bladder cancers (RR 2.2). The proportion of C2-C4 patients undergoing intervention in the Ca(+) cohort was not significantly different than the Ca(-). Potentially relevant extracolonic findings (E3) were increased in survivors of hematogenous malignancies (RR 2.0), while likely important extracolonic findings (E4) were increased in survivors of female gynecological malignancies (RR 3.4).
conclusionsRelevant colorectal and extracolonic findings at CTC screening are increased in patients with a previous extracolonic cancer history, particularly among certain cancer subsets. These results may have important implications for choice of colorectal test in these patients.
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.