ArticleInternational journal of cancer2025
Influence of a nationwide colorectal cancer screening program on the incidence of synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tumor-infiltrating immature innate lymphoid cells in colorectal cancer are biased toward ILC1/tissue-resident NK cell differentiation.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Prognostic Factors in Colorectal Cancer Patients with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastasis Undergoing Macroscopic Complete Resection: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026Article
- Influence of a nationwide colorectal cancer screening program on the incidence of synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Unpleasant but effective: Newspaper coverage of cancer screening and cancer in the Netherlands from 2010 to 2022.PloS one · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to assess the influence of colorectal cancer screening on the incidence of synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). Patients diagnosed with CPM between 2009 and 2022 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Crude rates of the observed and expected CPM incidence were calculated per 100,000 individuals and compared. Expected incidence was extrapolated from the incidence in the years prior to screening invitation. In total, 9,238 patients with CPM were included. For the screen-eligible population (55-75 years), the observed CPM incidence increased from 5.1 (2009) to 7.0 before screening initiation (2013) (Annual percent change [APC] 8.2%, p = .014). Since the start of screening, the observed CPM incidence stabilized: 8.8 (2014) to 8.9 (2022) (APC -1.0%, p = .159). Within the total population, the observed CPM incidence before screening showed an increase from 3.6 (2009) to 4.0 (2013) (APC 3.4%, p = .050). Since screening, a decrease in CPM incidence was observed from 4.4 (2014) to 3.5 (2022) (APC -2.2%, p = .010). The observed and expected number of CPM differed significantly in the screen-eligible population (6,437 observed vs. 7,992 expected individuals; p < .001) and in the overall Dutch population (9,238 observed vs. 10,440 expected individuals; p < .001). In conclusion, a declining trend was observed in the incidence of CPM in the Dutch population since the start of colorectal cancer screening. The observed incidence was lower compared to the expected incidence, both in the screen-eligible population and in the overall population. These findings suggest that screening results in a decrease of patients diagnosed with CPM possibly resulting in an improved survival of colorectal cancer patients.
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.