ArticleBMC cancer2025
Association between insulin resistance biomarkers and metastatic prognosis in treatment-naïve colorectal cancer patients: a pilot study.
Article in BMC 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.
- Association of preoperative insulin resistance surrogate indices with the risk of anastomotic leakage after colorectal cancer resection: a multicenter retrospective cohort.World journal of surgical 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) remains a significant global health burden, ranked among the most common causes of cancer-related fatalities. While insulin resistance (IR) biomarkers have been associated with CRC prognosis, their role in predicting metastasis remains unclear. Metastasis remains a critical determinant of prognosis and treatment planning in CRC. Identifying precise biomarkers can improve CRC management. This study evaluates the prognostic efficacy of lipid-based IR biomarkers in predicting metastasis in treatment-naïve CRC patients and selects the most appropriate one. We also explore their association with clinicopathological characteristics.
methodEighty-seven CRC patients (metastatic, n = 24; non-metastatic, n = 63) from four tertiary hospitals in India were analysed. Clinical data included TNM staging, ECOG-PS, KPS, CEA, and lipid profiles. Statistical tests included Fisher’s exact test, Mann-Whitney U-test, ROC curve analysis, Spearman’s correlation, multiple linear regression, and binary logistic regression.
resultsStatistically significant differences were observed in job status, diet, smoking, alcohol use, diabetes, BMI, and IR markers between metastatic and non-metastatic CRC patients. Among the IR biomarkers, the ratio of LDL to HDL (LHR) demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy with an AUC of 0.867 (p < 0.05, CI: 0.79–0.94), a sensitivity of 83.3%, and a specificity of 74.6%. Spearman correlation analysis unveiled a moderate-positive relationship between IR biomarkers and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, except for the triglyceride glucose index (TyG). Binary logistic regression identified LHR as the sole significant predictor of metastasis, with a one-unit increase in LHR corresponding to a 19.35% higher likelihood of metastasis. Multiple linear regression confirmed a moderate, significant combined effect of TNM staging, ECOG-PS, KPS, and LHR.
conclusionLHR strongly predicts metastasis in CRC patients, with high sensitivity and specificity among IR biomarkers. Its significant association with TNM staging, ECOG-PS, and CEA levels highlights its potential for early detection of metastasis and improved risk stratification. Larger studies are needed to validate its clinical utility for personalised treatment planning.
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.