Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30712157›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in gastroenterology2019

Colorectal Cancer in Young Adults.

Anand Venugopal, Elena M Stoffel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic Review of Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Risk for Metachronous Advanced Neoplasia in Patients With Young-Onset Colorectal Adenoma.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anand VenugopalDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Elena M StoffelDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA. Estoffel@med.umich.edu.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewRoutine screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in adults > 50 years of age has led to overall reductions in CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality. Yet CRC incidence among young adults age < 50 continues to increase without a clear explanation. This review examines the changing epidemiology of CRC and emerging evidence regarding the influence of genetic and lifestyle factors on risk for colorectal neoplasia. RECENT

findingsYoung-onset CRC (yCRC), defined as CRC diagnosed in individuals younger than age 50, is a heterogeneous disease. Approximately, one in every five individuals affected with yCRC carries a pathogenic germline variant in genes associated with predisposition to cancer. However, most have no clinically identifiable risk factors. Analyses of birth cohorts estimate CRC risk among millennials to be 2-4 times higher than their grandparents', suggesting that changes in health behaviors and environmental factors are having an impact on CRC risk. Young individuals with CRC tend to be diagnosed at later stages and often present with metastatic disease. yCRC tumors arise predominantly in the distal colon and are more likely than older-onset tumors to exhibit microsatellite and chromosome stable (MACS) phenotypes. Although yCRC patients are more likely than their older counterparts to be treated with multimodality chemotherapy regimens, more aggressive treatments have not yielded measurable survival gains. Since one in ten new CRC diagnoses involve individuals age < 50, recent guidelines have proposed lowering the age for average risk CRC screening from 50 to 45; however, further studies are needed to evaluate testing strategies based on individuals' age and risk. Significant shifts in CRC epidemiology and diversity of tumor phenotypes support genetic and environmental factors as modifiers of cancer risk. Emerging data correlating tumor molecular features with outcomes justify further investigation into mechanisms of carcinogenesis to elucidate how specific factors (inherited and/or acquired) might stimulate young-onset colorectal neoplasia.

Indexed as

Colorectal cancerGeneticsScreening

Identifiers

PMID30712157
OpenAlexW2914901445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.