ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
A Comparison of 11 Clinical Risk Scores for Prediction of Survival After Curative-Intent Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are the main determinant of survival in colorectal cancer, and radical resection offers the best oncological outcomes. However, heterogeneous clinicopathological features make appropriate patient selection essential. Numerous clinical risk scores (CRS) have been proposed to predict outcomes after liver resection for CRLM. This study evaluated the prognostic performance of 11 established CRS regarding survival after curative-intent resection of CRLM.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients who underwent curative-intent liver resection for CRLM at University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany, between 2010 and 2021. The following CRS were analyzed: Fong, Nordlinger, Nagashima, Konopke, Basingstoke Predictive Index, Tumor Burden Score, Resection Severity Index, Kulik, RAS-mutation CRS, Comprehensive Evaluation of Relapse Risk (CERR) score, and the Genetic and Morphological Evaluation score. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing. Predictive accuracy was assessed using the Akaike information criterion, Harrell's C-index for OS, and area under the curve (AUC) analyses for 1- and 5-year survival.
resultsA total of 528 patients were included, with a median OS of 26 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 23-28). All CRS except the Resection Severity Index significantly stratified patients according to OS. CERR consistently ranked among the top three scores for both the Akaike information criterion (1725) and the C-index (0.61) and had the highest accuracy for predicting 1-year survival (AUC 0.654, p = 0.001) and 5-year survival (AUC 0.62, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAlthough the CERR demonstrated the most consistent predictive performance, 10 of 11 evaluated CRS effectively stratified patients according to long-term survival after CRLM resection.
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.