ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021
Risk scoring system for recurrence after simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer liver metastasis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Safety and long-term prognosis of simultaneous versus staged resection in synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2022Pooled it
- Significance of serum APE1-AAbs, PTX-3, and miR-486-3p in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing radical surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Nomogram predicting early recurrence defined by the minimum P value approach for colorectal liver metastasis patients receiving colorectal cancer resection with simultaneous liver metastasis resection: development and validation.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Management of Colorectal Liver Mets in the Current Era.Cancer medicine journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastasis (SCRLM) has been widely applied. It is necessary to establish a risk scoring system to predict post-operative recurrence, especially in patients with neoadjuvant treatment.
methodsThe medical records of 221 patients undergoing simultaneous resection of CRLM were assessed in this study with a further 128 patients allocated to a validation group. All patients in the study group were classified according to their history of neoadjuvant treatment and univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to study independent risk factors. A score model was then generated according to the factors included. Our data set were also applied to validate three other existing scoring models [Fong clinical recurrence score (CRS), Konopke, and Zakaria disease-free survival (DFS) score], and the concordance index was calculated for comparison among these models.
resultsCRLM involving more than three nodes positive for a primary tumor was considered an independent risk factor for progression in patients without neoadjuvant treatment and all score models could discretely stratify patients according to disease free survival. In patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, CRLM involving more than one node and transfusion invasion were major determinants in patients after treatment. However, only our scoring system and Fong's CRS score could discretely discriminate patients. In the validation group, patients were significantly classified with the score system.
conclusionsExisting score models had better values for determining prognosis in patients with SCRLM, especially in those undertaking neoadjuvant treatment. Larger cohorts, along with more detailed clinical features and multicenter validation should be undertaken before utilization.
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.