Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34085129›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2021

Comparison of model fit and discriminatory ability of the 8th edition of the tumor-node-metastasis classification and the 9th edition of the Japanese classification to identify stage III colorectal cancer.

Kei Kitamura, Dai Shida, Shigeki Sekine, Yuka Ahiko, Yuya Nakamura, Konosuke Moritani, Shunsuke Tsukamoto, Yukihide Kanemitsu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kei KitamuraDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Dai ShidaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan. dshida@g.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3294-1924
Shigeki SekineMolecular Pathology Division, National Cancer Center Research Institute, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Yuka AhikoDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Yuya NakamuraDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Konosuke MoritaniDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Shunsuke TsukamotoDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Yukihide KanemitsuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
National Cancer Centre Japan · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe most widely accepted staging system for colorectal cancer (CRC) is the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification. In Japan, the Japanese Classification of Colorectal, Appendiceal, and Anal Carcinoma (JCCRC) system is used. The two systems differ mainly in relation to tumor deposits (TD) and metastasis in the regional lymph nodes along the main feeding arteries and lateral pelvic lymph nodes (N3). Here, we investigated the prognostic ability of the two systems for stage III CRC.

methodsWe reviewed 696 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection of stage III CRC at the National Cancer Center Hospital between May 2007 and April 2014. We examined the clinicopathological features of CRC and predicted overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) according to the 8th TNM and 9th JCCRC systems. The systems were compared using Akaike's information criterion (AIC), Harrell's concordance index (C-index), and time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

resultsThe 9th JCCRC system was more clinically effective according to AIC (OS, 1199 vs. 1206; RFS, 2047 vs. 2057), showed better discriminatory ability according to the C-index (OS, 0.65 vs. 0.62; RFS, 0.62 vs. 0.58), and its time-dependent ROC curve was superior compared with the 8th TNM system.

conclusionThese results suggest that the 9th JCCRC system has superior discriminative ability to the 8th TNM system, because the 9th JCCRC accounts for the presence of TD and N3 disease, which were both significant predictors of poor prognosis. Reconsidering the clinical value of these two factors in the TNM system could improve its clinical significance.

Indexed as

Colorectal cancerTNM classificationTumor deposits

Identifiers

PMID34085129
OpenAlexW3164998904

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.