ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2025
A prediction model for metachronous colorectal cancer: development and validation.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 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.
- Article
- The role of USP19 in human diseases: from molecular function to clinical relevance.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBeing able to estimate the risk of metachronous disease in a patient with colorectal cancer (CRC) could enable risk-appropriate surveillance. The aim of this study was to develop a risk-prediction model to estimate individual 10-year risk of metachronous disease following a CRC diagnosis.
methodsA population-based cohort of patients with CRC was recruited soon after diagnosis between 1997 and 2012 from the United States, Canada, and Australia. Cox regression with the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalization was used to identify factors that predicted the risk of a new primary CRC diagnosed at least 1 year after the initial CRC diagnosis. Potential predictors included demography, anthropometry, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, personal and family cancer history, medication use, age at diagnosis, and pathological features of the first CRC. Internal validation through bootstrapping was used to evaluate the discrimination and calibration.
resultsWe included 6085 CRC cases; 138 (2.3%) of these cases were diagnosed with metachronous disease over a median of 12 years (IQR = 5-17 years). Metachronous CRC risk was predicted by body mass index; smoking status; level of physical activity; family history of cancer and synchronous CRC; stage, grade, histological type, and DNA mismatch repair status; and age at diagnosis of the first CRC. The model was valid with a C statistic of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.68) and a calibration slope of 0.873 (SD = 0.087).
conclusionsMetachronous CRC can be predicted with reasonable accuracy using a prediction model that consists of clinical variables collected as part of routine practice.
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.