Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31053096›Full record

Observational studyBMC cancer2019

The association between post-treatment surveillance testing and survival in stage II and III colon cancer patients: An observational comparative effectiveness study.

Robert B Hines, Md Jibanul Haque Jiban, Adrian V Specogna, Priya Vishnubhotla, Eunkyung Lee, Shunpu Zhang

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Robert B HinesDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, 6900 Lake Nona Blvd, Orlando, FL, 328270, USA. robert.hines@ucf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7139-3102
Md Jibanul Haque JibanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, 6900 Lake Nona Blvd, Orlando, FL, 328270, USA.
Adrian V SpecognaUniversity of Central Florida College of Health Professions and Sciences, Orlando, FL, USA.
Priya VishnubhotlaOrlando Veterans' Affairs Medical Center, Orlando, FL, USA.
Eunkyung LeeUniversity of Central Florida College of Health Professions and Sciences, Orlando, FL, USA.
Shunpu ZhangDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, 6900 Lake Nona Blvd, Orlando, FL, 328270, USA.

Funding

College of Medicine, University of Central Florida 2016-2017 Research Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe best strategy for surveillance testing in stage II and III colon cancer patients following curative treatment is unknown. Previous randomized controlled trials have suffered from design limitations and yielded conflicting evidence. This observational comparative effectiveness research study was conducted to provide new evidence on the relationship between post-treatment surveillance testing and survival by overcoming the limitations of previous clinical trials.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database combined with Medicare claims (SEER-Medicare). Stage II and III colon cancer patients diagnosed from 2002 to 2009 and between 66 to 84 years of age were eligible. Adherence to surveillance testing guidelines-including carcinoembryonic antigen, computed tomography, and colonoscopy-was assessed for each year of follow-up and overall for up to three years post-treatment. Patients were categorized as More Adherent and Less Adherent according to testing guidelines. Patients who received no surveillance testing were excluded. The primary outcome was 5-year cancer-specific survival; 5-year overall survival was the secondary outcome. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using generalized boosted models was employed to balance covariates between the two surveillance groups. IPTW-adjusted survival curves comparing the two groups were performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Weighted Cox regression was used to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the relative risk of death for the Less Adherent group versus the More Adherent group.

resultsThere were 17,860 stage II and III colon cancer cases available for analysis. Compared to More Adherent patients, Less Adherent patients experienced slightly better 5-year cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.90) and worse 5-year noncancer-specific survival (HR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.43-1.82) for years 2 to 5 of follow-up. There was no difference between the groups in overall survival (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.98-1.10).

conclusionsMore surveillance testing did not improve 5-year cancer-specific survival compared to less testing and there was no difference between the groups in overall survival. The results of this study support a risk-stratified, shared decision-making surveillance strategy to optimize clinical and patient-centered outcomes for colon cancer patients in the survivorship phase of care.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overColonic NeoplasmsComparative Effectiveness ResearchFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm StagingPatient CompliancePopulation SurveillanceRetrospective StudiesSEER ProgramSurvival AnalysisColon cancerComparative effectiveness researchQuality of careSurveillanceSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID31053096
PMCPMC6500008

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.