The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Regression analysis of prognostic factors in colorectal cancer after curative resections
Abstract
The clinical, laboratory, and pathologic data of 310 patients who had curative resections were prospectively collected and analyzed in a multiple stepwise regression model. Although several factors (i.e., venous invasion) were of importance in univariate analysis, the following conclusions reflect the outcome and relative importance of the regression analysis only. Blood loss as an initial symptom and duration of symptoms were associated with a better prognosis. Location of the primary tumor, age, and sex did not appear to have prognostic value. Observations during operation such as palpable lymph nodes, fixity to adjacent organs, and tumor spill were related to a diminished tumor-free survival. Laboratory data (hemoglobin, leukocytes, ESR, GGTP, SGOT, SGPT, LDH, total protein, CEA) were tested for their potential prognostic values. Only a preoperative low protein level or an elevated CEA level were associated with an increased risk of death due to recurrent tumor. The histopathologic features (stage and grade), with the exception of venous invasion, were of relative importance in the determination of prognosis. The aforementioned variables can be included in a prognostic index on the base of which high-risk groups suitable for adjuvant studies can be identified.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Prognostic Factors in Prostate Cancer: College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999
Bostwick, D. G., Grignon, D. J., Hammond, M. E. H., Amin, M. B., Cohen, M., Crawford, D., Gospadarowicz, M., Kaplan, R. S., Miller, D. S., Montironi, R., et al. (2000) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/2000-124-0995-pfipc · Cited by 1,239
Prognostic Factors in Colorectal Cancer: College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999
Compton, C. C., Fielding, L. P., Burgart, L. J., Conley, B., Cooper, H. S., Hamilton, S. R., Hammond, M. E. H., Henson, D. E., Hutter, R. V. P., Nagle, R. B., et al. (2000) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/2000-124-0979-pficc · Cited by 1,230
American Joint Committee on Cancer prognostic factors consensus conference: Colorectal working group
Compton, C., Fenoglio-Preiser, C. M., Pettigrew, N., & Fielding, L. P. (2000) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(20000401)88:7<1739::aid-cncr30>3.0.co;2-t · Cited by 599
Risk factors for morbidity and mortality after colectomy for colon cancer
Longo, W. E., Virgo, K. S., Johnson, F. E., Oprian, C. A., Vernava, A. M., Wade, T. P., Phelan, M. A., Henderson, W. G., Daley, J., & Khuri, S. F. (2000) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/bf02237249 · Cited by 416
The impact of nutritional status on the prognoses of patients with advanced head and neck cancer
van Bokhorst-de van der Schueren, M. A. E., van Leeuwen, P. A. M., Kuik, D. J., Klop, W. M. C., Sauerwein, H. P., Snow, G. B., & Quak, J. J. (1999) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19990801)86:3<519::aid-cncr22>3.0.co;2-s · Cited by 344
Metadata
- Authors
- Wiggers, T., Arends, J. W., & Volovics, A.
- Venue
- Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
- Published
- 1988-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-41
- ISSN
- 0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2023755107
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Regression analysis of prognostic factors in colorectal cancer after curative resections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02552567
- The paper
- Wiggers, T., Arends, J. W., & Volovics, A. (1988). Regression analysis of prognostic factors in colorectal cancer after curative resections. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02552567
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.