ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Clinical calculator based on clinicopathological characteristics predicts local recurrence and overall survival following radical resection of stage II-III colorectal cancer.
Article in Frontiers in 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.
- Construction and external validation of a nomogram for predicting 10-year recurrence risk after radical resection in Chinese patients with stage III colorectal cancer.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Integrating perioperative inflammation and pathological invasiveness to predict recurrence after curative colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the risk factors and survival prognosis of local recurrence in stage II-III colorectal cancer (CRC) and develop a clinical risk calculator and nomograms to predict local recurrence and survival in treated patients. Methods: Patients who underwent radical surgery between January 2009 and December 2019 at the China National Cancer Center were included. Multivariate nomograms and a clinical risk calculator based on Cox regression were developed. Discrimination was measured with an area under curve (AUC) and variability in individual predictions was assessed with calibration curves. We stratified patients into different risk groups according to the established model to predict their prognosis and guide clinical practice. Results: The clinical risk calculator incorporated six variables: tumor thrombus, perineural invasion, tumor grade, pathology T-stage, pathology N-stage, and whether more than 12 lymph nodes were harvested. Our clinical risk calculator provided good discrimination, with AUC values of local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (0.764) and overall survival (OS) (0.815) in the training cohort and LRFS (0.740) and OS (0.730) in the test cohort. Calibration plots illustrated excellent agreement between the clinical risk calculator predictions and actual observations for 3- and 5-year LRFS and OS. Recurrence risk-stratified analysis showed that low-risk patients were more likely to undergo salvage radical surgery when recurrent disease existed. Conclusion: The clinical calculator can better account for tumor and patient heterogeneity, providing a more individualized outcome prognostication. The model is expected to aid in treatment planning, such as resectability evaluation, and it can be used in postoperative surveillance (https://oldcoloncancer.shinyapps.io/dynnomapp/).
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.