Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31150437›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Primary tumour location affects survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases: A two-institutional cohort study with international validation, systematic meta-analysis and a clinical risk score.

Elisabeth Gasser, Eva Braunwarth, Marina Riedmann, Benno Cardini, Nikolaus Fadinger, Jaroslav Presl, Eckhard Klieser, Philipp Ellmerer, Aurélien Dupré, Katsunori Imai and 8 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Time to surgery in patients with colorectal liver metastases.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

18 authors.

Elisabeth GasserDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Eva BraunwarthDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Marina RiedmannDepartment of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Health Economics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Benno CardiniDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Nikolaus FadingerDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Jaroslav PreslDepartment of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Eckhard KlieserInstitute of Pathology, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Philipp EllmererDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Aurélien DupréLiverpool Hepatobiliary Centre, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5216-538X
Katsunori ImaiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0549-1825
Hassan MalikLiverpool Hepatobiliary Centre, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Hideo BabaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Hanno UlmerDepartment of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Health Economics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Stefan SchneebergerDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Dietmar ÖfnerDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Adam DinnewitzerDepartment of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Stefan StättnerDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Florian PrimavesiDepartment of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-2707-6307

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) represents a major cause for cancer death and every third patient develops liver metastases (CRLM). Several factors including number and size of metastases and primary tumour lymph-node status have been linked to survival. The primary tumour location along the colo-rectum continuum (sidedness) was analysed in first-line chemotherapy trials, where right-sided CRCs showed decreased survival. This association has not yet been clearly established in patients undergoing resection for CRLM.

methodsClinicopathological differences in CRLM resections according to sidedness in two Austrian centres (2003-2016) are described and survival is compared through Kaplan-Meier and multivariable analysis. A risk-score is presented with time-dependent receiver operating curve analysis and international validation in two major hepatobiliary centres. Furthermore, a systematic meta-analysis of studies on primary tumour location and survival after CRLM resection was performed.

results259 patients underwent hepatectomy. Right-sided CRC patients (n = 59) more often had positive primary tumour lymph-nodes (76.3%/61.3%;p = 0.043) and RAS-mutations (60%/34.9%;p = 0.036). The median overall and disease-free survival was 33.5 and 9.1 months in right-sided versus 55.5 (p = 0.051) and 12.1 months (p = 0.078) in left-sided patients. In multivariable analysis nodal-status (HR 1.52), right-sidedness (HR 1.53), extrahepatic disease (HR 1.71) and bilobar hepatic involvement (HR 1.41) were significantly associated with overall survival. Sidedness was not independently associated with disease-free survival (HR 1.33; p = 0.099). A clinical risk score including right-sidedness, nodal-positivity and extrahepatic involvement significantly predicted overall (p = 0.005) and disease-free survival (p = 0.027), which was confirmed by international validation in 527 patients (p = 0.001 and p = 0.011). Meta-analysis including 10 studies (n = 4312) showed a significant association of right-sidedness with overall survival after resection (HR 1.55;p<0.001). There was no significant association with disease-free survival (HR 1.22;p = 0.077), except when rectal-cancers were excluded (HR 1.39;p = 0.006).

conclusionsPatients with liver metastases from right-sided CRC experience worse survival after hepatic resection. Sidedness is a simple yet effective factor to predict outcome.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustriaCohort StudiesColonic NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHepatectomyHumansLiverLiver NeoplasmsLymph NodesMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID31150437
PMCPMC6544347

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.