Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 517

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Survival after Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Trends in Outcomes for 1,600 Patients during Two Decades at a Single Institution

House, Michael G., Ito, Hiromichi, Gönen, Mithat, Fong, Yuman, Allen, Peter J., DeMatteo, Ronald P., Brennan, Murray F., Blumgart, Leslie H., Jarnagin, William R., D'Angelica, Michael I.·2010·Journal of the American College of Surgeons
DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.040
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study analyzes factors associated with differences in long-term outcomes after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer over time. STUDY DESIGN: Sixteen-hundred consecutive patients undergoing hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer between 1985 and 2004 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were grouped into 2 eras according to changes in availability of systemic chemotherapy: era I, 1985 to 1998; era II, 1999 to 2004. RESULTS: There were 1,037 patients in era I and 563 in era II. Operative mortality decreased from 2.5% in era I to 1% in era II (p = 0.04). There were no differences in age, Clinical Risk Score, or number of hepatic metastases between the 2 groups; however, more recently treated patients (era II) had more lymph node-positive primary tumors, shorter disease-free intervals, more extrahepatic disease, and smaller tumors. Median follow-up was 36 months for all patients and 63 months for survivors. Median and 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) were better in era II (64 months and 51% versus 43 months and 37%, respectively; p < 0.001); but median and 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) for all patients were not different (23 months and 33% era II versus 22 months and 27% era I; p = 0.16). There was no difference in RFS or DSS for high-risk (Clinical Risk Score >2, n = 506) patients in either era. There was a marked improvement in both RFS and DSS for low risk (Clinical Risk Score < or =2, n = 1,094) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite worse clinical and pathologic characteristics, survival but not recurrence rates after hepatic resection for colorectal metastases have improved over time and might be attributable to improvements in patient selection, operative management, and chemotherapy. The improvement in survival over time is largely accounted for by low-risk patients.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.040

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

See all 517

Metadata

Authors
House, M. G., Ito, H., Gönen, M., Fong, Y., Allen, P. J., DeMatteo, R. P., Brennan, M. F., Blumgart, L. H., Jarnagin, W. R., & D'Angelica, M. I.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Surgeons
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2010-05
Volume
210
Issue
5
Pages
744-752
ISSN
1072-7515 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.040
OpenAlex
W2059975503
Cited by
517
References
32
FWCI
15.67
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: Survival after Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Trends in Outcomes for 1,600 Patients during Two Decades at a Single Institution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.040
The paper
House, M. G., Ito, H., Gönen, M., Fong, Y., Allen, P. J., DeMatteo, R. P., Brennan, M. F., Blumgart, L. H., Jarnagin, W. R., & D'Angelica, M. I. (2010). Survival after Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Trends in Outcomes for 1,600 Patients during Two Decades at a Single Institution. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.12.040

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.