Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32734351›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021

Locoregional CT staging of colon cancer: does a learning curve exist?

Eun Kyoung Hong, Francesca Castagnoli, Nicolo Gennaro, Federica Landolfi, Carlos Perez-Serrano, Ieva Kurilova, Sander Roberti, Regina Beets-Tan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. CRCFound: A Colorectal Cancer CT Image Foundation Model Based on Self-Supervised Learning.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Eun Kyoung HongDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands. amyh0803@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5440-0451
Francesca CastagnoliDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Nicolo GennaroDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Federica LandolfiDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Carlos Perez-SerranoDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Ieva KurilovaDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Sander RobertiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Regina Beets-TanDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the learning curve for locoreginal staging of colon cancer in radiologist trainees.

methodsEighty-eight cases of colon cancer CT were included in this retrospective study. Four senior radiology residents staged the CTs according to TNM classification. Two out of four radiologists received feedback after reading every 20 cases. Radiologic staging was compared with pathologic staging and the learning curve, diagnostic performance, reader confidence and reading time were evaluated and compared between the two groups (feedback vs. no feedback). Generalized estimating equations logistic regression, QICu statistic, ANOVA and t test/Mann-Whitney test were utilized.

resultsRadiologists demonstrated a significant increase in their performance to distinguish between ≤ T2 and ≥ T3 and reached an inflection point at 38 cases, with a significant association with increased number of cases reviewed (P < 0.001). Sensitivity (P < 0.001), specificity (P = 0.030) and NPV (P = 0.002) demonstrated significant associations with increased experience. The overall reader's confidence was significantly higher in the group which received feedback (P < 0.001). There was no significant improvement in performance nor in reader's confidence for N staging (N0 vs. ≥ N1) for all readers. Reading time decreased with experience and showed a significant negative association with experience (P < 0.001).

conclusionDiagnostic performance of senior radiology trainees in differentiating between T2 and T3 colon cancer on CTs improved with increased experience. In contrast, evaluation of lymph node involvement did not improve with more experience. Feedback had no significant effect on improvement of diagnostic performances.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsLearning CurveHumansNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedColon cancerComputed tomographyLearning curveStaging

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.