ReviewWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Consensus Molecular Subtypes (CMS) Classification: a progress towards Subtype-Driven treatments in colorectal cancer.
Review in World journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- The Association of FIT-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening with Earlier Disease Detection: The Romanian Experience.Cancers · 2026Article
- Anticancer Effects of Cucurbitacin B and Meleagrin Associated with TYRO3 Downregulation in Colorectal Cancer Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Carvacrol induces apoptosis, modulates oxidative stress, and promotes G0/G1 cell cycle arrest in colorectal cancer cells.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2026Article
- Colorectal cancer pathogenesis, oncogenic signaling networks and targeted therapeutic advances.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Review
- Analysis of Consensus Molecular Subtypes of Colorectal Cancer in Oman with Clinicopathologic Correlation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Advances in immunotherapy for colorectal cancer: overcoming resistance in mismatch repair-proficient tumors.Cancer cell international · 2026Review
- From mono- to multi-cellularFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Network-level reprogramming of cell death pathways in colorectal cancer cells by combined thymoquinone and 5-fluorouracil treatment.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Integrated transcriptomic profiling reveals immune and molecular stage-specific signatures of colorectal cancer in hispanics living in Puerto Rico.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Spatial immune archetypes in gastric and colorectal cancer: a proposed conceptual framework for immunotherapy resistance and therapeutic remodeling.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is heterogeneous with varied molecular profiles, clinical outcomes, and treatment responses. The Consensus Molecular Subtypes (CMS) classification categorizes CRC into four molecular subtypes (CMS1-4) based on gene expression profiles, aiming to improve prognosis prediction and guide personalized therapy.
objectiveThis paper reviews the CMS classification, its prognostic and predictive roles, methods of identification, association with polyps, immunotherapy applications, intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH), and barriers to clinical adoption.
methodsThe review synthesizes data from global studies on CMS, searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, till June 2025, focusing on gene expression profiling, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and image-based CMS (imCMS) classifiers based on computational models (such deep learning). It examines CMS-specific treatment responses, immune profiles, and emerging strategies like single-cell RNA sequencing to address ITH.
resultsCMS classifies CRC into four subtypes: CMS1 (MSI-immune, ~ 15%), CMS2 (canonical, ~ 40%), CMS3 (metabolic, ~ 13%), and CMS4 (mesenchymal, ~ 22%). CMS is prognostic in adjuvant (e.g., PETACC-3, NSABP C-07) and metastatic settings (e.g., CALGB 80405, FIRE-3), with CMS2 linked to the best survival and CMS4 the worst outcomes. CMS1 responds to immunotherapy, CMS2/3 to bevacizumab, and CMS4 to irinotecan. Classification methods include gene expression profiling, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and image-based CMS (imCMS), but intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH) and technical barriers hinder clinical adoption. Solutions like single-cell sequencing and standardized assays are emerging.
conclusionCMS classification enhances CRC prognosis and treatment personalization but faces challenges due to ITH and technical limitations. Advances in IHC, imCMS, and targeted gene panels may facilitate broader clinical adoption, improving patient outcomes through tailored therapies.
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.