ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2024
Variation in the detection of lymphovascular invasion in T1 colorectal cancer and its impact on treatment: A nationwide Dutch study.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 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.
- A machine learning-based transcriptomic signature for predicting tumor recurrence after curative resection in T1 colorectal cancer: a retrospective multicenter cohort study (The Tw1CE trial).International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Noninvasive prediction of lymphovascular invasion in rectal cancer without lymph node metastasis using a SHAP-interpretable combined model integrating MRI radiomics features and clinical immune-inflammatory biomarkers: a bicenter study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- T1 Colorectal Cancer: What Are the Barriers to Minimizing Unnecessary Surgical Interventions?United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Response to Letter to the Editor.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Variation in the detection of lymphovascular invasion in T1 colorectal cancer and its impact on treatment: A nationwide Dutch study.United European gastroenterology journal · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymphovascular invasion (LVI) plays an important role in determining the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and influencing treatment decisions and patient outcomes.
objectiveThis study evaluated how the detection of LVI varies between Dutch laboratories and investigated its impact on the treatment and oncological outcomes of T1 CRC patients.
methodsPathology reports and clinical data of T1 CRC patients who underwent local resection between 2015 and 2019 were obtained from the Dutch nationwide pathology databank (Palga cohort, n = 5513). Data on the standard of LVI diagnosis (H&E/Immunohistochemistry) were not available. We categorized laboratories as low, average, or high detectors and evaluated the impact of LVI detection practice on the surgical resection rate and the proportion of LNM-negative (LNM-) surgeries. In the second part of the study, we used the Dutch T1 CRC Working Group cohort (n = 1268) to evaluate the impact of LVI detection practice on cancer recurrences during follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and Cox proportional hazard regression were used to study the association between LVI detection practice and the outcomes.
resultsIn the PALGA cohort, the proportion of surgical resections after local resection of a T1 CRC was significantly higher among patients diagnosed by laboratories with a high LVI detection rate (high vs. low: adjusted OR [aOR] 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.52-2.31) as was the proportion of LNM-surgeries (aOR 1.73; 95% CI 1.39-2.15). In the second cohort, no significant difference was observed in cancer recurrences among patients diagnosed in laboratories with high detection rates compared with low detection rates (aHR 2.23; 95% CI 0.94-5.23).
conclusionThese findings suggest that a high detection rate of LVI does not improve oncological outcomes and may expose more patients to unnecessary oncological surgery, emphasizing the need for standardization of LVI diagnosis.
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.