ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Comparative prediction of lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer among Western and Japanese guidelines.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Young age or surgical selection? Interpreting lymph-node metastasis risk in T1 colorectal cancer.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Clinicopathological features and risk stratification for lymph node metastasis in early-stage colorectal cancer (from intramucosal carcinoma to SM2): a large-scale retrospective study based on a Chinese population.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- New risk factor classified by intramucosal polypoid/non-polypoid growth pattern in earlycolorectal cancer.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Chinese clinical practice guidelines for super minimally invasive surgery of digestive tract tumors.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2025Article
- Retrospective accuracy analysis of major guidelines and factors for lymph node metastasis of pT1 colorectal cancer.Endoscopy international open · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Additional surgery with lymph node (LN) dissection is recommended for pT1 colorectal carcinoma (CRC) resected by endoscopy, based on pathological risk factors for LN metastasis (LNM), according to guidelines by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 560 consecutive patients with T1 CRC who underwent endoscopic resection alone (n=190) or initial or additional surgery with LN dissection (n=370) between 1992 and 2017 at Hiroshima University Hospital. Patients were classified into LNM low- and high-risk groups according to guidelines by the JSCCR, NCCN, and ESMO as follows. Patients without any specified pathological LNM risk factor were included in the LNM low-risk group, while the high-risk group comprised all other patients. We analyzed the LNM predictive ability of each guideline. Results: The LNM high-risk rate, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, accuracy of LNM risk, and AUC for LNM predictive ability were 82%, 100%, 19%, 9%, 100%, 26% and 0.596 in the JSCCR guidelines; 52%, 98%, 52%, 15%, 99%, 56%, and 0.749 in the NCCN; and 54%, 98%, 50%, 15%, 99%, 54%, and 0.743 in the ESMO, respectively. Conclusions: The JSCCR guidelines could diagnose LNM in all cases but had the highest false-positive rate. It is important to reduce unnecessary additional surgeries for pT1 CRCs after ER.
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.