ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2019
Role of surveillance imaging and endoscopy in colorectal cancer follow-up: Quality over quantity?
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Personalized surveillance in colorectal cancer: Integrating circulating tumor DNA and artificial intelligence into post-treatment follow-up.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Early-Stage Colon Cancer Surveillance: Pattern and Timing of Recurrence and the Role of 5-Year Surveillance.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Follow-Up Adherence After Treatment With Curative Intent for Stage II and III Colorectal Cancer Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Post recurrence survival in early versus late period and its prognostic factors in rectal cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- A refined prediction of early recurrence combining tumor deposits in patients with resected rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Clinical presentation, management, screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Review
- Elevated CEA and CA 19-9 Levels within the Normal Ranges Increase the Likelihood of CRC Recurrence in the Chinese Han Population.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2022Article
- Reevaluating the Evidence for Intensive Postoperative Extracolonic Surveillance for Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2022Article
- Efficacy of endoscopic surveillance in the detection of local recurrence after radical rectal cancer surgery is limited? A retrospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- A new practical classification of desmoplastic reaction in endoscopic forceps biopsy of colorectal cancer.Histology and histopathology · 2021Article
- Defining early recurrence in patients with resected primary colorectal carcinoma and its respective risk factors.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- The added value of pelvic surveillance by MRI during postoperative follow-up of rectal cancer, with a focus on abbreviated MRI.European radiology · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent disease and represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed world. Intensive post-treatment surveillance is routinely recommended by major expert groups for early stage (II and III) CRC survivors because previous meta-analyses showed a modest, but significant survival benefit. This practice has been recently challenged based on data emerging from several large phase III randomized trials that demonstrated a lack of survival benefit from intensive surveillance strategies. In addition, findings from cost-effectiveness analyses of such an approach are inconsistent. Data on real-world practice, specifically adherence to these follow-up guidelines, are also limited. The debate is especially controversial in resected stage IV patients where there are currently no clear guidelines for follow-up. In an era of personalized medicine, there may be a shift towards a more risk-adapted approach to better define the optimal follow-up strategy. In this article, we review the evidence and highlight the role of surveillance in CRC survivors.
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.