Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31201493›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2019

Prognostic value of N1c in colorectal cancer: a large population-based study using propensity score matching.

Feng Shen, Xia Hong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Feng ShenDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, 234 Gucui Road, Hangzhou, 310012, Zhejiang, China.
Xia HongDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, 234 Gucui Road, Hangzhou, 310012, Zhejiang, China. hongxiatongde@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5937-8628

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe conducted this large population-based study to investigate the prognostic significance of N1c.

methodsPatients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) database between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2010, were included in the sample. The primary outcome of interest used in our study was cause-specific survival (CSS). Cox proportional hazards models and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to evaluate the prognostic value of N1c. Propensity score matching (PSM) was implemented to reduce the possibility of selection bias using a logistic regression model.

resultsA total of 19,991 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer were identified from the SEER database. The median follow-up time of the whole cohort was 60 months (0-71 months). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that N1c was associated with significantly higher risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality compared with N0 (HR = 1.962, 95%CI = 1.642 to 2.343, P < 0.001) and N1a (HR = 0.818, 95%CI = 0.678 to 0.987, P = 0.036); N1c was associated with significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality compared with N2a (HR = 1.296, 95%CI = 1.081 to 1.554, P = 0.005) and N2b (HR = 1.663, 95%CI = 1.391 to 1.989, P < 0.001). Yet the CSS difference between N1b and N1c did not achieve statistical difference (HR = 1.089, 95%CI = 0.909 to 1.304, P = 0.354).

conclusionsThe large population-based and propensity score-matched study with long follow-up time provides the first evidence that CSS difference between N1b and N1c does not achieve a statistical difference.

Indexed as

Propensity ScoreAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasm StagingPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsSEER ProgramColorectal cancerN1cPropensity score-matchedTumor deposit

Identifiers

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.