Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30338661›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2018

Adherence to postresection colorectal cancer surveillance at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers.

Sonia S Kupfer, Sam Lubner, Emmanuel Coronel, Perry J Pickhardt, Matthew Tipping, Peter Graffy, Eileen Keenan, Eric Ross, Tianyu Li, David S Weinberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Follow-up surveillance among colorectal cancer survivors of different sexual orientations.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sonia S KupferSection of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.ORCID 0000-0003-4857-2289
Sam LubnerUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Emmanuel CoronelSection of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Perry J PickhardtUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Matthew TippingUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Peter GraffyUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Eileen KeenanFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Eric RossFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Tianyu LiFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
David S WeinbergFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

Comparative Effectiveness of Virtual and Optical Colonoscopy for CRC SurveillanceR01CA155347 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI WEINBERG, DAVID S · 2011 to 2015
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA155347
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Guidelines recommend surveillance after resection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but rates of adherence to surveillance are variable and have not been studied at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. The aim of this study was to determine rates of adherence to standard postresection CRC surveillance recommendations including physician visits, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), computed tomography (CT), and colonoscopy after CRC resection at three NCI-designated centers. Data on patients with resected CRC from 2010 to 2017 were reviewed. Adherence to physician visits was defined as having at least two visits within 14 months after surgical resection. CEA adherence was defined as having at least four CEA levels drawn within 14 months. CT and colonoscopy adherence were defined as completing each between 10 and 14 months from surgical resection. Chi-square test and logistic regression analyses were performed for overall adherence and adherence to individual components. A total of 241 CRC patients were included. Overall adherence was 23%. While adherence to physician visits was over 98%, adherence to CEA levels, CT, and colonoscopy were each less than 50%. Center was an independent predictor of adherence to CEA, CT, and/or colonoscopy. Stage III disease predicted CT adherence, while distance traveled of 40 miles or less predicted colonoscopy adherence. Overall adherence to postresection CRC guideline-recommended care is low at NCI-designated centers. Adherence rates to surveillance vary by center, stage, and distance traveled for care. Understanding factors associated with adherence is critical to ensure CRC patients benefit from postresection surveillance.

Indexed as

Patient CompliancePostoperative PeriodAgedCancer Care FacilitiesCarcinoembryonic AntigenColonoscopyColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)Retrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUnited StatesCarcinoembryonic Antigencolorectal cancersurveillancesurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID30338661
PMCPMC6247039
OpenAlexW2897618997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.