ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2019
Lymph Node Ratio Versus TNM System As Prognostic Factor in Colorectal Cancer Staging. a Single Center Experience.
Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic value of metastatic lymph node ratio and its effect on disease-free survival in colon cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Lymph node ratio is a more robust predictor of overall survival than N stage in stage III colorectal adenocarcinoma.Diagnostic pathology · 2024Review
- Five-year follow-up mortality prognostic index for colorectal patients.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Observational
- Transcriptomic Profiling Reveals an Enhancer RNA Signature for Recurrence Prediction in Colorectal Cancer.Genes · 2023Article
- Building a knowledge base for colorectal cancer patient care using formal concept analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Desmoplastic reactions and epithelial-mesenchymal transition proteins in stages II and III colorectal cancer: association with and prognostic value for disease-free survival.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
- Construction of a new clinical staging system for colorectal cancer based on the lymph node ratio: A validation study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Prognostic value of lymphovascular invasion in stage II colorectal cancer patients with an inadequate examination of lymph nodes.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Expression Patterns of Microenvironmental Factors and Tenascin-C at the Invasive Front of Stage II and III Colorectal Cancer: Novel Tumor Prognostic Markers.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Monoamine Oxidase B Expression Correlates with a Poor Prognosis in Colorectal Cancer Patients and Is Significantly Associated with Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition-Related Gene Signatures.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to establish the actual validity of the lymph node ratio (LNR) as a prognostic factor for colorectal cancer patients, and to verify differences of survival and disease-free interval.
methodsPatients referred with colorectal cancer who underwent potentially curative surgery between January 1997 and December 2011 were included. Lymph node ratio, TNM staging and survival were extracted from surgical, histological and follow-up records.
resultsTwo hundred eigthy six patients with different stages of colorectal cancer underwent surgery, with comparison of survival prediction based on lymph node ratio and TNM staging. The overall survival rate was 78.3%, the recurrence rate was 11.9% and the mortality rate was estimated as 21.7%. Univariate analysis in relation to survival was significant for the following variables: serum level of CEA, CA 19.9 value, degree of histological differentiation, and tumor growth. There weren't any statistically significant differences for the LNR (LNR </ ≥0.16: p = 0.116). The TNM system was effective both in discriminating between survival stages (Stage II vs. Stage III: p = 0.05) and in differentiating sub-groups (p = 0.05).
conclusionsLNR alone could not be considered a better prognostic factor than the TNM system. However, future studies are needed in a larger number of patients with a standardized surgical, pathological and medical protocol.
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.