ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Center2024
The development and implementation of pathological parameters and molecular testing impact prognosis of colorectal adenocarcinoma.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Center, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- ZG16B: A key regulator of tumor progression and immune microenvironment modulation in cancer (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Machine learning to develop and validate a model for predicting the risk of lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Prognostic Factors and Nomogram-Based Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer Patients With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastasis Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Deepath-MSI: a clinic-ready deep learning model for microsatellite instability detection in colorectal cancer using whole-slide imaging.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Tumor-stroma ratio in colitis-associated colorectal cancer.Upsala journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to analyze how changes in pathological diagnosis practice and molecular detection technology have affected clinical outcomes for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC). Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 21,141 pathologically confirmed CRC cases diagnosed at FUSCC from 2008 to 2020. Patients were divided into five groups for different analytical purposes: (1) the before vs. since 2014 groups to analyze the influence of the changes in the classification criteria of pT3 and pT4 staging on the survival of patients; (2) the partial vs. total mesorectal excision (TME) groups to analyze whether evaluation of completeness of the mesorectum have impact on the survival of patients; (3) the tumor deposit (TD)(+)N0 vs. TD(+)N1c groups to analyze the influence of the changes in the pN staging on the survival of patients with positive TD and negative regional lymph node metastasis (LNM); (4) the before vs. since 2013 groups to analyze the influence of the changes in the testing process of deficient mismatch repair on the survival of patients; and (5) the groups with vs. without RAS/BRAF gene mutation testing to analyze the influence of these testing on the survival of patients. Patients' clinicopathological parameters, including age at diagnosis, sex, tumor size, location, differentiation, mucinous subtype, TD, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, tumor depth, LNM and distant metastasis, and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log rank method was performed for patients' overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) analyses. Results: In pathological reports, there were three parameter changes that impacted patient outcomes. Firstly, changes in the pT staging criteria led to a shift of the ratio of patients with stage pT3 to stage pT4 from 1: 110.9 to 1: 0.26. In comparison to patients admitted before 2014 ( Conclusion: Over the past few decades, updates in elements in pathological reports, as well as the development of standardized tests for MMR/MSI status and RAS/BRAF gene mutations have significantly improved patient outcomes.
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.