ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2026
Impact of age and rurality on colorectal cancer outcomes in the United States.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundWhile overall colorectal cancer (CRC) rates have declined in the United States (U.S.), early-onset CRC (EO-CRC), diagnosed before age 50, has increased. Rural U.S. residents face higher CRC incidence than non-rural counterparts. We aimed to examine the relationship between age at diagnosis and EO-CRC outcomes and whether rurality modify these associations.
methodsWe analyzed data from 835,907 patients aged 20-79 years in the 2006-2020 SEER Program. Rurality was defined using U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations between age, rurality, and late-stage CRC diagnosis. Competing-risk regression models were applied to evaluate CRC-specific mortality, accounting for non-CRC deaths. Patients aged 50-59 years residing in non-rural areas served as the reference group for joint age-rurality analyses. All models adjusted for demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and treatment factors.
resultsPatients aged 30-39 (aOR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.44-1.54) and 40-49 (aOR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.40-1.46) had significantly higher odds of late-stage CRC compared with those aged 50-59, with the strongest associations observed among non-rural patients aged 30-39 (aOR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.46-1.58). In competing-risk models, rural patients were at higher CRC-specific mortality across all age groups, with relative hazard increases ranging from 8% in older adults (70-79) to 21% in younger adults (20-29) compared with their non-rural counterparts.
conclusionAdults aged 30-49 had higher odds of late-stage CRC than those 50-59, especially in non-rural areas. Rural residence was associated with higher CRC-specific mortality across all ages. Overall, age more strongly predicted late-stage diagnosis, while rurality more strongly predicted mortality. Earlier detection and improved clinical awareness in younger adults may reduce advanced-stage disease and CRC deaths.
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.