ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Decreasing Use of CT in Favor of Colonoscopy: A Retrospective Analysis of Post-Operative Imaging in Nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H Sporadic Colorectal Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is surgery necessary for mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer patients with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant immunotherapy? A retrospective cohort study with literature context.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- ASO Author Reflections: Addressing the Rising Burden of Colon and Rectum Cancer in China: Gender Disparities, Trends, and Projections.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is no significant difference in postoperative follow-up imaging examinations for varying mismatch repair (MMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) statuses for sporadic colorectal cancer while facing different prognoses.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study, using Kaplan-Meier curve to compare survival/progression status by varying imaging examination and frequency, using Cox regression to analyze tumor characteristic impact on survival, and monitoring polyp detection time in each colonoscopy screening.
resultsA total of 282 deficient MMR (dMMR)/MSI-high (MSI-H) patients were included. After a 7 year follow-up, all patients-including 143 examined by CT and colonoscopy, 86 singularly examined (CT/colonoscopy/ultrasound), and 53 received no imaging examination-demonstrated a favorable overall survival (87.97%, 95% CI 75.99-89.19) and disease-free survival (81.92%, 95% CI 70.38-89.30), which had no significant difference between imaging methods. Cox regression proved that different imaging methods had no influence on the prognosis. Stage III patients experienced a deterioration in disease-free survival but not differed between varying imaging methods. Different CT follow-up interval exhibited no difference in survival and progression. Polyps were detected in 39.75% (64/161) of patients during follow-up; 32.81% (21/64) were detected in colonoscopy conducted 0-6 months after surgery, reaching the highest. For multiple polyps, the median of detection interval was 13-24 months (first and second polyps), 7-12 months (second and third polyps).
conclusionsFor nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H sporadic colorectal cancer patients, less CT scans (interval > 1 year) are tolerable because of good prognosis, whereas more colonoscopy screenings (0-6 months after surgery first year; 13-24 months after first polyps detection; 7-12 months after second polyps detection) is considerable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39948309What 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.