ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Association of a newly developed Cancer Cachexia Score with survival in Stage I-III colorectal cancer.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probing the Depths of Molecular Complexity: STAT3 as a Key Architect in Colorectal Cancer Pathogenesis.Current gene therapy · 2025Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCancer cachexia, a complex multifactorial syndrome associated with sarcopenia, negatively affects the quality of life and survival in patients with several cancers. We aimed to develop a new score for cachexia assessment and evaluate its effectiveness in the classification of patients undergoing radical resection for colorectal cancer.
methodsThis study included 396 patients who underwent radical resection for Stage I-III colorectal cancer. To develop the Cancer Cachexia Score (CCS), we analyzed predictive factors of cachexia status related to the development of sarcopenia and incorporated significant factors into the score. We then evaluated the relationship between CCS and survival after radical resection for colorectal cancer.
resultsAs body mass index (P < 0.001), prognostic nutritional index (P = 0.005), and tumor volume (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with the development of sarcopenia, these factors were included in CCS. Using CCS, 221 (56%), 98 (25%), and 77 (19%) patients were diagnosed with mild, moderate, and severe cancer cachexia, respectively. In multivariate analysis, severe CCS (P < 0.001), N stage 1-2 (P < 0.001), and occurrence of postoperative complications (P = 0.007) were independent predictors of disease-free survival. Age ≥ 65 years (P = 0.009), severe CCS (P < 0.001), and N stage 1-2 (P < 0.001) were independent predictors of overall survival.
conclusionsCCS may be a useful prognostic factor for predicting poor survival after radical resection in patients with Stage I-III colorectal cancer.
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.