Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33210982›Full record

ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2020

Tumour-stroma ratio has poor prognostic value in non-pedunculated T1 colorectal cancer: A multi-centre case-cohort study.

Hao Dang, Gabi W van Pelt, Krijn Jc Haasnoot, Yara Backes, Sjoerd G Elias, Tom Cj Seerden, Matthijs P Schwartz, Bernhard Wm Spanier, Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel, Jeroen D van Bergeijk and 20 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Tumor Location as a Prognostic Factor in T1 Colorectal Cancer.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2022
    Review
  13. UEGWeek: The modern School of Athens.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: An Update on Best Practice.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2021
    Review
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

30 authors at 14 institutions in 2 countries.

Hao DangDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5502-4980
Gabi W van PeltDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Krijn Jc HaasnootDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Yara BackesDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sjoerd G EliasJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Tom Cj SeerdenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Matthijs P SchwartzDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Bernhard Wm SpanierDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen CappelDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Jeroen D van BergeijkDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Gelderse Vallei, Ede, The Netherlands.
Koen KesselsDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6427-4137
Joost Mj GeesingDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
John N GroenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sint Jansdal, Harderwijk, The Netherlands.
Frank Ter BorgDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, The Netherlands.
Frank Hj WolfhagenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis A SeldenrijkPathology DNA, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Mihaela G RaicuPathology DNA, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Anya N MilnePathology DNA, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Anja Ug van LentDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lodewijk Aa BrosensDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
G Johan A OfferhausDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter D SiersemaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Rob Aem TollenaarDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
James Ch HardwickDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9575-5099
Lukas Jac HawinkelsDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leon Mg MoonsDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Miangela M LacleDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wilma E MeskerDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jurjen J BoonstraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Dutch T1 CRC Working Group
Leiden University Medical Center · NLUtrecht University · NLSt. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NLAlbert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis · NLAmphia Ziekenhuis · NLAZ Sint-Jan · BEDeventer Ziekenhuis · NLDiakonessenhuis hospital · NLIsala · NLMeander Medisch Centrum · NLOLVG · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRijnstate Hospital · NLZiekenhuis Gelderse Vallei · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent risk stratification models for early invasive (T1) colorectal cancer are not able to discriminate accurately between prognostic favourable and unfavourable tumours, resulting in over-treatment of a large (>80%) proportion of T1 colorectal cancer patients. The tumour-stroma ratio (TSR), which is a measure for the relative amount of desmoplastic tumour stroma, is reported to be a strong independent prognostic factor in advanced-stage colorectal cancer, with a high stromal content being associated with worse prognosis and survival. We aimed to investigate whether the TSR predicts clinical outcome in patients with non-pedunculated T1 colorectal cancer.

methodsHematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained tumour tissue slides from a retrospective multi-centre case cohort of patients with non-pedunculated surgically treated T1 colorectal cancer were assessed for TSR by two independent observers who were blinded for clinical outcomes. The primary end point was adverse outcome, which was defined as the presence of lymph node metastasis in the resection specimen or colorectal cancer recurrence during follow-up.

resultsAll 261 patients in the case cohort had H&E slides available for TSR scoring. Of these, 183 were scored as stroma-low, and 78 were scored as stroma-high. There was moderate inter-observer agreement (κ = 0.42). In total, 41 patients had lymph node metastasis, 17 patients had recurrent cancer and five had both. Stroma-high tumours were not associated with an increased risk for an adverse outcome (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.37-1.18;

conclusionsOur study emphasises that existing prognosticators may not be simply extrapolated to T1 colorectal cancers, even though their prognostic value has been widely validated in more advanced-stage tumours.

Indexed as

desmoplasiaprognosisT1 colorectal cancertumour micro-environmenttumour–stroma ratio

Identifiers

PMID33210982
PMCPMC8259249
OpenAlexW3104107081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.