ArticleBritish journal of cancer2025
Impact of socioeconomics on recurrences and survival in non-metastasized colorectal cancer.
Article in British journal of cancer, 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.
- Insurance Co-Payment Status and Advanced-Stage Presentation of Colorectal Cancer in a Universal Healthcare System: A Surgical Cohort Study From Japan.World journal of surgery · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSurvival differences between socioeconomic groups in colorectal cancer have been studied for patients diagnosed in the 90s and 00s, but research on recent patients using individual measures of socioeconomic position is limited.
methodsCRCBaSe, a database of linked national registry data, was used to analyse stage I-III colorectal cancer patients diagnosed in Sweden between 2008 and 2021. The exposures of interest were income and education. Flexible parametric survival models were fitted and standardised survival probabilities and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for cancer-specific survival, recurrence, and overall survival.
resultsAnalysis of 59,995 patients showed better 5-year standardised cancer-specific survival in the least deprived income group, 77.8% (95%CI 76.9-78.6) vs. 73.2% (95%CI 72.6-73.9) in the most deprived income group, HR 0.93 (95%CI 0.87-0.99). Time to recurrence was not statistically different between socioeconomic groups. Overall survival was better in the least deprived income group, with a 5-year standardised overall survival of 70.0% (95%CI 69.1-70.8) vs. 63.5% (95%CI 62.9-64.1) in the most deprived income group, HR 0.82 (95%CI 0.79-0.86).
conclusionWe found large disparities in cancer-specific and overall survival between the highest and most deprived income and education groups, despite improvements in care and the introduction of guidelines.
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.