Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30514228›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2018

The lymph node status as a prognostic factor in colon cancer: comparative population study of classifications using the logarithm of the ratio between metastatic and nonmetastatic nodes (LODDS) versus the pN-TNM classification and ganglion ratio systems.

Carlos Fortea-Sanchis, David Martínez-Ramos, Javier Escrig-Sos

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Prognostic value of PLN, LNR, and LODDS in advanced colorectal signet ring cell carcinoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A Prognostic Activity of Glutaredoxin 1 Protein (Grx1) in Colon Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carlos Fortea-SanchisDepartment of Surgery, Division of Colorectal Surgery, Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, Av. Doctor Clara, 19, 12002, Castellón, Spain. carlosfortea@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7635-740X
David Martínez-RamosDepartment of Surgery, Hospital General de Castellón, Av. Benicassim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Javier Escrig-SosDepartment of Surgery, Hospital General de Castellón, Av. Benicassim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Hospital General Universitari de Castelló · ESConsorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundpN stage in the TNM classification has been the "gold standard" for lymph node staging of colorectal carcinomas, but this system recommends collecting at least 12 lymph nodes for the staging to be reliable. However, new prognostic staging systems have been devised, such as the ganglion quotients or lymph node ratios and natural logarithms of the lymph node odds methods. The aim of this study was to establish and validate the predictive and prognostic ability of the lymph node ratios and natural logarithms of the lymph node odds staging systems and to compare them to the pN nodal classification of the TNM system in a population sample of patients with colon cancer.

methodsA multicentric population study between January 2004 and December 2007. The inclusion criteria were that the patients were: diagnosed with colon cancer, undergoing surgery with curative intent, and had a complete anatomopathological report. We excluded patients with cancer of the rectum or caecal appendix with metastases at diagnosis. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier actuarial method and the Log-Rank test was implemented to estimate the differences between groups in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival. Multivariate survival analysis was performed using Cox regression.

resultsWe analysed 548 patients. For the overall survival, the lymph node ratios and natural logarithms of the lymph node odds curves were easier to discriminate because their separation was clearer and more balanced. For disease-free survival, the discrimination between the pN0 and pN1 groups was poor, but this phenomenon was adequately corrected for the lymph node ratios and natural logarithms of the lymph node odds curves which could be sufficiently discriminated to be able to estimate the survival prognosis.

conclusionsLymph node ratios and natural logarithms of the lymph node odds techniques can more precisely differentiate risk subgroups from within the pN groups. Of the three methods tested in this study, the natural logarithms of the lymph node odds was the most accurate for staging non-metastatic colon cancer. Thus helping to more precisely adjust and individualise the indication for adjuvant treatments in these patients.

Indexed as

Population SurveillanceAgedColonic NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGanglion CystsHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRegistriesRetrospective StudiesColorrectal cancerLog ratioLymph nodePrognosis

Identifiers

PMID30514228
PMCPMC6280498
OpenAlexW2902952412

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.