SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2026
A comparison of overall survival from early-onset and late-onset colorectal cancer stratified by TNM stage: a systematic review.
Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2026. 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.
- The impact of age on survival in stage II colon cancer: a SEER database analysis stratified by chemotherapy status.Translational cancer research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is conflicting evidence whether survival outcomes are better for early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) or late-onset (LO) CRC. This review aimed to determine overall survival (OS) differences between EOCRC and LOCRC stratified by TNM stage.
methodsEMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched using approved search terms for CRC, survival outcomes and early onset disease. Studies which compared OS between early- and late-onset CRC, irrespective of age cut-off, stratified by TNM stage, were included. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies was used to assess methodology and risk of bias. Data on 5-year OS, TNM stage, histopathological features, cohort study type and use of confounder-adjusted analyses were extracted and descriptive statistics presented as study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis.
resultsA total of 21 studies described the OS of 332451 patients: 29199 EOCRC and 303252 LOCRC. Studies mostly found favourable outcomes in EOCRC, but where multiple age groups were compared, worse survival was frequently observed in the very youngest patients, especially in stage II and III disease.
conclusionEOCRC may have worse OS in age and stage subgroups. This warrants further study using large, granular datasets with detailed information on staging and histopathological features. PROSPERO ID CRD42024563472. An earlier version of this review was presented at the Association of Coloproctologists of Great Britain and Ireland Annual General Meeting in July 2023 and the Tripartite Colorectal Meeting 2025.
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.