Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34533595›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2021

Tumour-stroma ratio outperforms tumour budding as biomarker in colon cancer: a cohort study.

Marloes A Smit, Gabi W van Pelt, Valeska Terpstra, Hein Putter, Rob A E M Tollenaar, Wilma E Mesker, J Han J M van Krieken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Marloes A SmitDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3961-5040
Gabi W van PeltDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Valeska TerpstraDepartment of Pathology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Hein PutterDepartment of Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5395-1422
Rob A E M TollenaarDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6831-6082
Wilma E MeskerDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5533-4778
J Han J M van KriekenDepartment of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Han.vanKrieken@radboudumc.nl.

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding project 2016-10174
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The tumour-stroma ratio (TSR) and tumour budding (TB) are two high-risk factors with potential to be implemented in the next TNM classification. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the practical application of the two biomarkers based on reproducibility, independency and prognostic value. Patients diagnosed with stage II or III colon cancer who underwent surgery between 2005 and 2016 were included. Both TSR and TB were scored on haematoxylin and eosin-stained tissue sections. The TSR, based on the relative amount of stroma, was scored in increments of 10%. TB was scored following the consensus guidelines; a bud was defined as ≤ 4 tumour cells. For analysis, three categories were used. Cohen's kappa was used for reproducibility. The prognostic value was determined with survival analysis. In total, 246 patients were included. The TSR distribution was N = 137 (56%) stroma-low and N = 109 (44%) stroma-high. The TB distribution was TB-low N = 194 (79%), TB-intermediate N = 35 (14%) and TB-high N = 17 (7%). The reproducibility of the TSR was good (interobserver agreement kappa = 0.83 and intraobserver agreement kappa = 0.82), whereas the inter- and intraobserver agreement for scoring TB was moderate (kappa 0.47 and 0.45, respectively). The survival analysis showed an independent prognostic value for disease-free survival for TSR (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.01-2.44; p = 0.048) and for TB-high (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.02-3.96; p = 0.043). Based on current results, we suggest the TSR is a more reliable parameter in daily practice due to better reproducibility and independent prognostic value for disease-free survival.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsBiomarkersCohort StudiesHumansPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersColon cancerPersonalised medicineTumour buddingTumour microenvironmentTumour-stroma ratio

Identifiers

PMID34533595
PMCPMC8589816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.