Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40374531›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pathology. Clinical research2025

Investigation of three alternative histopathological scoring methods at the invasive tumour front in colorectal cancer.

Walaiphorn Woraharn, Ashley McCulloch, Christopher Bigley, Phimmada Hatthakarnkul, Kathryn Pennel, Peter Alexander, Hester van Wyk, Antonia Roseweir, Jennifer Hay, Noori Maka and 4 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pathology. Clinical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Walaiphorn WoraharnSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Ashley McCullochSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Christopher BigleySchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Phimmada HatthakarnkulSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Kathryn PennelSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0186-1331
Peter AlexanderSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Hester van WykAcademic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Antonia RoseweirSchool of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6158-1564
Jennifer HayGlasgow Tissue Research Facility, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Noori MakaDepartment of Pathology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
James ParkDepartment of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.
Nigel B JamiesonSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Joanne EdwardsSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7192-6906
Campbell Sd RoxburghSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK CTRQQR-2021/100006Chief Scientist Office Scotland EPD/22/13Medical Research Council MR/R502327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the characteristics at the invasive tumour front in colorectal cancer (CRC) are simple to assess, they are not included in routine pathology reports because they lack reproducibility and standardisation. In this study, we aimed to validate alternative scoring methods at the invasive tumour front in a large cohort of stage I-III CRC. The retrospective analysis was performed on haematoxylin and eosin-stained sections from 538 patients. At the invasive tumour front, tumour characteristics were scored using three alternative methods: the Karamitopoulou method, which evaluates the percentage of infiltrative tumour; the Taskin method, a five-point grading scale; and the tumour growth pattern (TGP) method, which classifies patterns as pushing, intermediate, or infiltrative. For interobserver assessment, the Karamitopoulou and TGP methods showed good agreement while the Taskin method presented fair agreement. High scores with the Karamitopoulou and Taskin methods correlated significantly with adverse prognostic factors, particularly advanced T stage (p < 0.001), N stage (p < 0.001), and the presence of peritoneal involvement (p < 0.001). The survival rate of the TGP method demonstrated that patients with an infiltrative growth pattern had significantly worse CRC survival compared to those with pushing and intermediate growth patterns (p < 0.001) and the TGP method retained its independence as a prognostic factor in multivariable Cox regression analysis only for colon cancer-specific survival (p < 0.001). The TGP scoring method is an independent prognostic factor only for colon cancer with simple and inexpensive assessment, underlining its practicality in routine reporting. Additionally, this method could be included as an additional histopathological risk indicator with the potential to guide therapeutic decision making.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingObserver VariationPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studiescolorectal cancergrowth patternhistopathological scoringinvasive tumour front

Identifiers

PMID40374531
PMCPMC12081161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.