ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2022
Colorectal cancer and the blood loss paradox.
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors of the colon in pediatrics: clinical presentation, management, and outcomes-A case report and systematic review of literature.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- Triaging colorectal urgent referrals in the COVID-19 era using faecal immunochemical testing: a prospective UK real-world multicentre cohort study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Clinicopathological Differences between Right and Left Colorectal Cancer by Sex.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Absolute and Functional Iron Deficiency in Colon Cancer: A Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Faecal occult blood (FOB) positivity and iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) are common manifestations of colorectal cancer (CRC) and both potentially facilitate diagnosis at an earlier, more treatable stage. It has been assumed that both are the consequence of low-grade blood loss from the tumour bed. Method: A retrospective analysis of 1121 cases of CRC diagnosed at a single centre between 2010 and 2016, comparing cases presenting via FOB-based Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) and IDA pathways for a series of variables including age, sex, tumour location and prevalence of anaemia. Results: The BCSP and IDA pathways each accounted for about 15% of the total case load. There were significant differences between the BCSP and IDA sub-groups in median age (68 vs 78 years: p<0.001), median haemoglobin (138 vs 89 g/L: p<0.001) and proportion of lesions in right colon (31.1% vs 82.5%: p<0.001). The major disparity in the prevalence of anaemia (overall 20.0% vs 98.2%: p<0.001) persisted when controlled for tumour location. Conclusion: Paradoxically, CRC screening through the detection of FOB positivity and IDA identifies distinctly different sub-populations of cases. The theoretical implication is that an additional mechanism may be required to explain the development of IDA in CRC. The practical implication is that detection of IDA may have a complementary role to the BCSP in population screening for CRC.
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.