SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2023
The effect of time before diagnosis and treatment on colorectal cancer outcomes: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.
Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of preoperative weight-loss interventions on outcomes after elective non-bariatric surgery: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative faecal immunochemical tests to guide colorectal cancer pathway referral in primary care. A systematic review, meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Timeliness of Colorectal Cancer Care in Veterans: The Role of Travel Distance.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- SAGES colorectal and metabolic bariatric surgery committee joint task force call to action for synchronized severe obesity and colorectal cancer management.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- The pathway to diagnosis of early-onset colorectal cancer: exploring diagnostic intervals and their effect on outcomes.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Factors Associated with Treatment Delays in Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander Patients with Colorectal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Optimal timing of cancer treatments: a call for emerging evidence from clinical trials and real-world studies.British journal of cancer · 2025Review
- Colorectal cancer research priorities in Uganda: perspectives from local key experts and stakeholders.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer.
methodsFour databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose-response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival.
resultsOne hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose-response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days.
conclusionThe review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis. REGISTRATION: This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864.
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.