ArticleCancer diagnosis & prognosis
Clinical Implication of KRAS Mutation Variants in Patients With Resected Colon Cancer.
Article in Cancer diagnosis & prognosis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- An integrative mutational and network analysis of pancreatic cancer reveals key genes, and signalling pathways.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Integrated Decision-Making in the Treatment of Colon-Rectal Cancer: The Case of KRAS-Mutated Tumors.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study evaluated the clinical implication of KRAS proto-oncogene, GTPase (KRAS) mutation variants in patients with resected colon cancer (CC). Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 482 patients diagnosed with CC who underwent curative surgical resection at Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital. The inclusion criteria were: Pathologically diagnosed with primary CC; stage I-III CC according to the 7th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system; and with available test results for KRAS mutation status. In total, 345 patients met these criteria and were included in this study. Results: Among the 345 patients, 140 (40.6%) exhibited KRAS mutations, with their incidences as follows: 90/140 (64.3%) in exon 2 codon 12, 37/140 (26.4%) in exon 2 codon 13, 1/140 (0.1%) in exon 3 codon 59, 7/140 (5.0%) in exon 3 codon 61, and 5/140 (3.6%) in exon 4 codon 146. KRAS mutation status was not a significant prognostic factor for disease-free survival or overall survival. Although there were no significant differences in survival between patients with exon 2 codon 12 and exon 2 codon 13 mutations, poorer disease-free survival (p=0.085) and overall survival (p=0.005) were seen in those with exon 3 codon 61 mutation than in others. Conclusion: KRAS mutation status was not correlated with survival, but exon 3 codon 61 mutation might be a factor for poor prognosis in patients after resection of CC.
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.