ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2025
Lavage cytology diagnosed by immunostaining may be a poor prognostic factor in pathological stage III colorectal cancer.
Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lavage cytology diagnosed by immunostaining may be a poor prognostic factor in pathological stage III colorectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To clarify the prognostic impact of positive lavage cytology diagnosed by immunostaining on long-term outcomes following curative resection for pathological stage III colorectal cancer (CRC). Method: We retrospectively investigated patients who underwent radical resection and intraoperative lavage cytology (LCY) simultaneously for pathological stage III primary CRC between 2005 and 2017. All LCY specimens were evaluated by Papanicolaou staining and immunostaining for carcinoembryonic antigen and Ber-EP4. Only Class V diagnosed by either staining method was defined as positive LCY, and patients were classified into two groups: a positive lavage cytology (LCY+) group; and a negative lavage cytology (LCY-) group. Overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were compared between groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify clinicopathological factors affecting OS and RFS. Results: Among 708 patients with pathological stage III CRC, 30 patients (4.2%) showed positive LCY. OS and RFS were significantly lower in the LCY(+) group than in the LCY(-) group. Five-y OS rates in the LCY(+) and LCY(-) groups were 58.7% and 91.0%, respectively, and 5-y RFS rates were 28.8% and 76.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that positive LCY was independently associated with lower OS and RFS. In the LCY(+) group, the proportion of patients with negative Papanicolaou staining but positive immunostaining was 20.0% (6 of 30). No significant differences in OS and RFS were evident between those patients and patients with positive results for both Papanicolaou staining and immunostaining. Conclusion: Positive LCY as diagnosed by immunostaining may represent a poor prognostic factor for pathological stage III CRC.
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.