Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,563

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Colorectal cancer

Open access
Kuipers, Ernst J., Grady, William M., Lieberman, David, Seufferlein, Thomas, Sung, Joseph J., Boelens, Petra G., van de Velde, Cornelis J. H., Watanabe, Toshiaki·2015·Nature Reviews Disease Primers
DOI 10.1038/nrdp.2015.65
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Colorectal cancer had a low incidence several decades ago. However, it has become a predominant cancer and now accounts for approximately 10% of cancer-related mortality in western countries. The ‘rise’ of colorectal cancer in developed countries can be attributed to the increasingly ageing population, unfavourable modern dietary habits and an increase in risk factors, such as smoking, low physical exercise and obesity. New treatments for primary and metastatic colorectal cancer have emerged, providing additional options for patients; these treatments include laparoscopic surgery for primary disease, more-aggressive resection of metastatic disease (such as liver and pulmonary metastases), radiotherapy for rectal cancer, and neoadjuvant and palliative chemotherapies. However, these new treatment options have had limited impact on cure rates and long-term survival. For these reasons, and the recognition that colorectal cancer is long preceded by a polypoid precursor, screening programmes have gained momentum. This Primer provides an overview of the current state of the art of knowledge on the epidemiology and mechanisms of colorectal cancer, as well as on diagnosis and treatment.

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 · 10.1038/nrdp.2015.65

Cites

23 of 23 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 23 references

Research works printed but not linked: 204

  1. Kuipers, E. J., Rösch, T. & Bretthauer, M. Colorectal cancer screening — optimizing current strategies and new directions. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 10, 130–142 (2013). A review of the current state of the art of colorectal cancer screening. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Warthin, A. S. Heredity with reference to carcinoma: as shown by the study of the cases examined in the pathological laboratory of the University of Michigan. Arch. Intern. Med. 12, 546–555 (1913). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Capelle, L. G. et al. Risk and epidemiological time trends of gastric cancer in Lynch syndrome carriers in the Netherlands. Gastroenterology 138, 487–492 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  4. Vasen, H. F. A., Tomlinson, I. & Castells, A. Clinical management of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 12, 88–97 (2015). · DOI
  5. Papamichael, D. et al. Treatment of colorectal cancer in older patients: International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) consensus recommendations 2013. Ann. Oncol. 26, 463–476 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Heemskerk-Gerritsen, B. A. M. et al. Improved overall survival after contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with a history of unilateral breast cancer: a prospective analysis. Int. J. Cancer 136, 668–677 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  7. De Jonge, V. et al. Quality evaluation of colonoscopy reporting and colonoscopy performance in daily clinical practice. Gastrointest. Endosc. 75, 98–106 (2012). · doi:10.1016/j.gie.2011.06.032
  8. Valori, R. et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition — quality assurance in endoscopy in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. Endoscopy 44, SE88–SE105 (2012). This paper describes the results of extensive international consensus on quality-assurance measures for colorectal cancer screening. · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1291641
  9. Rohani-Rasaf, M., Abdollahi, M., Jazayeri, S., Kalantari, N. & Asadi-Lari, M. Correlation of cancer incidence with diet, smoking and socio-economic position across 22 districts of Tehran in 2008. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 14, 1669–1676 (2013). · DOI
  10. Draft, C. et al. Global, regional and national levels of age-specific mortality and 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 385, 1990–2013 (2015).
  11. Tiwari, A. K., Roy, H. K. & Lynch, H. T. Lynch syndrome in the 21st century: clinical perspectives. QJM http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv137 (2015). · DOI
  12. Pérez-Carbonell, L. et al. Comparison between universal molecular screening for Lynch syndrome and revised Bethesda guidelines in a large population-based cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut 61, 865–872 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  13. Van Lier, M. G. F. et al. Yield of routine molecular analyses in colorectal cancer patients ≤70 years to detect underlying Lynch syndrome. J. Pathol. 226, 764–774 (2012). · DOI
  14. Jess, T. et al. Decreasing risk of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease over 30 years. Gastroenterology 143, 375–381.e1 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Castaño-Milla, C., Chaparro, M. & Gisbert, J. P. Systematic review with meta-analysis: the declining risk of colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 39, 645–659 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Herrinton, L. J. et al. Incidence and mortality of colorectal adenocarcinoma in persons with inflammatory bowel disease from 1998 to 2010. Gastroenterology 143, 382–389 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Fedirko, V. et al. Alcohol drinking and colorectal cancer risk: an overall and dose-response meta-analysis of published studies. Ann. Oncol. 22, 1958–1972 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Liang, P. S., Chen, T.-Y. & Giovannucci, E. Cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cancer 124, 2406–2415 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Botteri, E. et al. Smoking and colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. JAMA 300, 2765–2778 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Song, M., Garrett, W. S. & Chan, A. T. Nutrients, foods, and colorectal cancer prevention. Gastroenterology 148, 1244–1260.e16 (2015). An extensive review of the current knowledge on nutrients and colorectal cancer risk as well as prevention. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Dahm, C. C. et al. Dietary fiber and colorectal cancer risk: a nested case–control study using food diaries. 102, 614–626 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Arem, H. et al. Physical activity and cancer-specific mortality in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort. Int. J. Cancer 135, 423–431 (2014). · DOI
  23. Algra, A. M. & Rothwell, P. M. Effects of regular aspirin on long-term cancer incidence and metastasis: a systematic comparison of evidence from observational studies versus randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 13, 518–527 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Doubeni, C. A. et al. Contribution of behavioral risk factors and obesity to socioeconomic differences in colorectal cancer incidence. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 104, 1353–1362 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Erdrich, J., Zhang, X., Giovannucci, E. & Willett, W. Proportion of colon cancer attributable to lifestyle in a cohort of US women. Cancer Causes Control 26, 1271–1279 (2015). · DOI
  26. Platz, E. A. et al. Proportion of colon cancer risk that might be preventable in a cohort of middle-aged US men. Cancer Causes Control 11, 579–588 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  27. Aleksandrova, K. et al. Combined impact of healthy lifestyle factors on colorectal cancer: a large European cohort study. BMC Med. 12, 168 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Andersen, V. & Vogel, U. Systematic review: interactions between aspirin, and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and polymorphisms in relation to colorectal cancer. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 40, 147–159 (2014). · DOI
  29. Nan, H. et al. Association of aspirin and NSAID use with risk of colorectal cancer according to genetic variants. JAMA 313, 1133–1142 (2015). A large study combining data from multiple case–control and cohort studies looking at the preventive effect of aspirin and NSAID use on the risk of colorectal cancer. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Bardou, M., Barkun, A. & Martel, M. Effect of statin therapy on colorectal cancer. Gut 59, 1572–1585 (2010). A review on the preventive effects of statin therapy on the development of colorectal cancer. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Liu, Y. et al. Association between statin use and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 42 studies. Cancer Causes Control 25, 237–249 (2014). · DOI
  32. Limsui, D. et al. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and colorectal cancer risk by molecularly defined subtypes among older women. Gut 61, 1299–1305 (2012). · DOI
  33. Ogino, S., Chan, A. T., Fuchs, C. S. & Giovannucci, E. Molecular pathological epidemiology of colorectal neoplasia: an emerging transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary field. Gut 60, 397–411 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Hanahan, D. & Weinberg, R. A. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 100, 57–70 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  35. Grady, W. M. & Carethers, J. M. Genomic and epigenetic instability in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 135, 1079–1099 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  36. Fearon, E. R. & Vogelstein, B. A genetic model for colorectal tumorigenesis. Cell 61, 759–767 (1990). · DOI · Paper page
  37. Zeki, S. S., Graham, T. A. & Wright, N. A. Stem cells and their implications for colorectal cancer. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 8, 90–100 (2011). · DOI
  38. Jones, S. et al. Comparative lesion sequencing provides insights into tumor evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 4283–4288 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  39. Luo, Y. et al. Differences in DNA methylation signatures reveal multiple pathways of progression from adenoma to colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 147, 418–429.e8 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Van Engeland, M., Derks, S., Smits, K. M., Meijer, G. A. & Herman, J. G. Colorectal cancer epigenetics: complex simplicity. J. Clin. Oncol. 29, 1382–1391 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  41. Goldstein, N. S. Serrated pathway and APC (conventional)-type colorectal polyps: molecular–morphologic correlations, genetic pathways, and implications for classification. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 125, 146–153 (2006). · DOI
  42. Jass, J. R. Hyperplastic polyps and colorectal cancer: is there a link? Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2, 1–8 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Bettington, M. et al. The serrated pathway to colorectal carcinoma: current concepts and challenges. Histopathology 62, 367–386 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  44. Rex, D. K. et al. Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 107, 1315–1329 (2012). Expert panel recommendations for the detection and management of serrated colorectal polyps. · DOI · Paper page
  45. Kambara, T. et al. BRAF mutation is associated with DNA methylation in serrated polyps and cancers of the colorectum. Gut 53, 1137–1144 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  46. Noffsinger, A. E. Serrated polyps and colorectal cancer: new pathway to malignancy. Annu. Rev. Pathol. 4, 343–364 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  47. Chittenden, T. W. et al. Functional classification analysis of somatically mutated genes in human breast and colorectal cancers. Genomics 91, 508–511 (2008). · DOI
  48. Jubb, A. M., Bell, S. M. & Quirke, P. Methylation and colorectal cancer. J. Pathol. 195, 111–134 (2001). · DOI
  49. Starr, T. K. et al. A transposon-based genetic screen in mice identifies genes altered in colorectal cancer. Science 323, 1747–1750 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  50. Parsons, D. W. et al. Colorectal cancer: mutations in a signalling pathway. Nature 436, 792 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  51. Grady, W. M. & Pritchard, C. C. Molecular alterations and biomarkers in colorectal cancer. Toxicol. Pathol. 42, 124–139 (2014). A review on the molecular pathways that lead to colorectal cancer. · DOI
  52. Bardelli, A. et al. Mutational analysis of the tyrosine kinome in colorectal cancers. Science 300, 949 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  53. Lao, V. V. & Grady, W. M. Epigenetics and colorectal cancer. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 8, 686–700 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  54. Kim, Y.-H. et al. CpG island methylation of genes accumulates during the adenoma progression step of the multistep pathogenesis of colorectal cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 45, 781–789 (2006). · DOI
  55. Worthley, D. L. et al. DNA methylation within the normal colorectal mucosa is associated with pathway-specific predisposition to cancer. Oncogene 29, 1653–1662 (2010). · DOI
  56. Yamauchi, M. et al. Assessment of colorectal cancer molecular features along bowel subsites challenges the conception of distinct dichotomy of proximal versus distal colorectum. Gut 61, 847–854 (2012). A study showing the correlation between the molecular features of colorectal cancer and the location of the tumour. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Rosty, C. et al. PIK3CA activating mutation in colorectal carcinoma: associations with molecular features and survival. PLoS ONE 8, e65479 (2013). · DOI
  58. Galon, J. et al. Towards the introduction of the “Immunoscore” in the classification of malignant tumours. J. Pathol. 232, 199–209 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  59. Kostic, A. D. et al. Genomic analysis identifies association of Fusobacterium with colorectal carcinoma. Genome Res. 22, 292–298 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  60. Tahara, T. et al. Fusobacterium in colonic flora and molecular features of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer Res. 74, 1311–1318 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  61. Mima, K. et al. Fusobacterium nucleatum and T cells in colorectal carcinoma. JAMA Oncol. 1, E1–E9 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  62. Morris, E. J. A., Rutter, M. D., Finan, P. J., Thomas, J. D. & Valori, R. Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) rates vary considerably depending on the method used to calculate them: a retrospective observational population-based study of PCCRC in the English National Health Service. Gut 64, 1248–1256 (2014). · DOI
  63. Kaminski, M. F. et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 1795–1803 (2010). The first study to show that the risk of post-colonoscopy cancer is higher when the colonoscopy was performed by an endoscopist with low adenoma detection rates. · DOI · Paper page
  64. Zauber, A. G. et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 687–696 (2012). This study is a long-term follow-up of the National Polyp Study, showing persistently lower mortality of colorectal cancer after colonoscopy with adenoma removal. · DOI · Paper page
  65. Pox, C. P. et al. Efficacy of a nationwide screening colonoscopy program for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 142, 1460–1467.e2 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  66. Winawer, S. J. et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N. Engl. J. Med. 329, 1977–1981 (1993). · DOI · Paper page
  67. Sanduleanu, S. et al. Definition and taxonomy of interval colorectal cancers: a proposal for standardising nomenclature. Gut 64, 1257–1267 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  68. Nagorni, A., Bjelakovic, G. & Petrovic, B. Narrow band imaging versus conventional white light colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 1, CD008361 (2012).
  69. Pohl, J. et al. Pancolonic chromoendoscopy with indigo carmine versus standard colonoscopy for detection of neoplastic lesions: a randomised two-centre trial. Gut 60, 485–490 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  70. Waye, J. D. et al. A retrograde-viewing device improves detection of adenomas in the colon: a prospective efficacy evaluation (with videos). Gastrointest. Endosc. 71, 551–556 (2010). · DOI
  71. Leufkens, A. M. et al. Effect of a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: the TERRACE study. Gastrointest. Endosc. 73, 480–489 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  72. DeMarco, D. C. et al. Impact of experience with a retrograde-viewing device on adenoma detection rates and withdrawal times during colonoscopy: the Third Eye Retroscope Study Group. Gastrointest. Endosc. 71, 542–550 (2010). · DOI
  73. Van Gossum, A. et al. Capsule endoscopy versus colonoscopy for the detection of polyps and cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 361, 264–270 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  74. Spada, C. et al. Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy compared with colonoscopy. Gastrointest. Endosc. 74, 581–589.e1 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  75. Spada, C. et al. Meta-analysis shows colon capsule endoscopy is effective in detecting colorectal polyps. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 8, 516–522.e8 (2010). · DOI
  76. Spada, C. et al. Colon capsule endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 44, 527–536 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  77. Rex, D. K. et al. Accuracy of capsule colonoscopy in detecting colorectal polyps in a screening population. Gastroenterology 148, 948–957.e2 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  78. Sung, J. J. Y. et al. An updated Asia Pacific Consensus Recommendations on colorectal cancer screening. Gut 64, 121–132 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  79. Kim, D. H. et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 1403–1412 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  80. Pickhardt, P. J., Hassan, C., Halligan, S. & Marmo, R. Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection — systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 259, 393–405 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  81. Spada, C. et al. Colon capsule versus CT colonography in patients with incomplete colonoscopy: a prospective, comparative trial. Gut 64, 272–281 (2015). · DOI
  82. Park, S. H. et al. CT colonography for detection and characterisation of synchronous proximal colonic lesions in patients with stenosing colorectal cancer. Gut 61, 1716–1722 (2012). · DOI
  83. Plumb, A. A. et al. CT colonography in the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: national survey of current practice. Clin. Radiol. 68, 479–487 (2013). · doi:10.1016/j.crad.2012.10.018
  84. De Wijkerslooth, T. R. et al. Burden of colonoscopy compared to non-cathartic CT-colonography in a colorectal cancer screening programme: randomised controlled trial. Gut 61, 1552–1559 (2012). · DOI
  85. De Haan, M. C., van Gelder, R. E., Graser, A., Bipat, S. & Stoker, J. Diagnostic value of CT-colonography as compared to colonoscopy in an asymptomatic screening population: a meta-analysis. Eur. Radiol. 21, 1747–1763 (2011). · DOI
  86. Pooler, B. D., Kim, D. H., Lam, V. P., Burnside, E. S. & Pickhardt, P. J. CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS): benchmark values from a clinical screening program. Am. J. Roentgenol. 202, 1232–1237 (2014). · doi:10.2214/ajr.13.11272
  87. Stoop, E. M. et al. Participation and yield of colonoscopy versus non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 13, 55–64 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  88. Yee, J. et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria colorectal cancer screening. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 11, 543–551 (2014). · DOI
  89. Spada, C. et al. Clinical indications for computed tomographic colonography: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guideline. Endoscopy 46, 897–915 (2014). · DOI
  90. Grützmann, R. et al. Sensitive detection of colorectal cancer in peripheral blood by septin 9 DNA methylation assay. PLoS ONE 3, e3759 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  91. Church, T. R. et al. Prospective evaluation of methylated SEPT9 in plasma for detection of asymptomatic colorectal cancer. Gut 63, 317–325 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  92. Ahlquist, D. A. et al. Stool DNA and occult blood testing for screen detection of colorectal neoplasia. Ann. Intern. Med. 149, 441–450 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  93. Bosch, L. J. W. et al. Molecular tests for colorectal cancer screening. Clin. Colorectal Cancer 10, 8–23 (2011). · DOI
  94. Kuipers, E. J. Colorectal cancer: screening — one small step for mankind, one giant leap for man. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 11, 5–6 (2014). · DOI
  95. Brenner, H., Altenhofen, L., Stock, C. & Hoffmeister, M. Natural history of colorectal adenomas: birth cohort analysis among 3.6 million participants of screening colonoscopy. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 22, 1043–1051 (2013). · DOI
  96. Schreuders, E. H. et al. Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes. Gut 64, 1637–1649 (2015). A review of existing colorectal cancer programmes worldwide. · DOI · Paper page
  97. Singh, H. et al. The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer. Gastroenterology 139, 1128–1137 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  98. Brenner, H., Stock, C. & Hoffmeister, M. Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Br. Med. J. 2467, 1–12 (2014). A systematic review on the long-term effect of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.
  99. Le Clercq, C. M. C. et al. Metachronous colorectal cancers result from missed lesions and non-compliance with surveillance. Gastrointest. Endosc. 82, 325–333.e2 (2015). · DOI
  100. Hoff, G., Grotmol, T., Skovlund, E. & Bretthauer, M. Risk of colorectal cancer seven years after flexible sigmoidoscopy screening: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 338, b1846 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  101. Atkin, W. S. et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 375, 1624–1633 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  102. Segnan, N. et al. Once-only sigmoidoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: follow-up findings of the Italian Randomized Controlled Trial — SCORE. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 103, 1310–1322 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  103. Van Putten, P. G. et al. Nurse endoscopists perform colonoscopies according to the international standard and with high patient satisfaction. Endoscopy 44, 1127–1132 (2012). · doi:10.1055/s-0032-1310154
  104. Stephens, M. et al. Non-physician endoscopists: a systematic review. World J. Gastroenterol. 21, 5056–5071 (2015). · DOI
  105. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, I., van Ballegooijen, M., Zauber, A. G., Habbema, J. D. F. & Kuipers, E. J. Effect of rising chemotherapy costs on the cost savings of colorectal cancer screening. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 101, 1412–1422 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  106. Inadomi, J. M. et al. Adherence to colorectal cancer screening: a randomized clinical trial of competing strategies. Arch. Intern. Med. 172, 575–582 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  107. Van Dam, L., Kuipers, E. J., Steyerberg, E. W., van Leerdam, M. E. & de Beaufort, I. D. The price of autonomy: should we offer individuals a choice of colorectal cancer screening strategies? Lancet Oncol. 14, e38–e46 (2013). · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(12)70455-2
  108. Hol, L. et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gut 59, 62–68 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  109. Van Rossum, L. G. et al. Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population. Gastroenterology 135, 82–90 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  110. Wilschut, J. A. et al. Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 103, 1741–1751 (2011). · doi:10.1093/jnci/djr385
  111. Quintero, E. et al. Colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 697–706 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  112. Kapidzic, A. et al. Attendance and yield over three rounds of population-based fecal immunochemical test screening. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 109, 1257–1264 (2014). · DOI
  113. Van Roon, A. H. C. et al. Diagnostic yield improves with collection of 2 samples in fecal immunochemical test screening without affecting attendance. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 9, 333–339 (2011). · DOI
  114. Goede, S. L. et al. Cost-effectiveness of one versus two sample faecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer screening. Gut 62, 727–734 (2012). · DOI
  115. Van Roon, A. H. C. et al. Random comparison of repeated faecal immunochemical testing at different intervals for population-based colorectal cancer screening. Gut 62, 409–415 (2012). · DOI
  116. Hol, L. et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing at different cut-off levels. Br. J. Cancer 100, 1103–1110 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  117. Van Heijningen, E. M. B. et al. Features of adenoma and colonoscopy associated with recurrent colorectal neoplasia based on a large community-based study. Gastroenterology 144, 1410–1418 (2013). · DOI
  118. Lieberman, D. A. et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 143, 844–857 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  119. Martínez, M. E. et al. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology 136, 832–841 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  120. Løberg, M. et al. Long-term colorectal-cancer mortality after adenoma removal. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 799–807 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  121. Hassan, C. et al. Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 45, 842–851 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  122. Cairns, S. R. et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups. Gut 59, 666–689 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  123. Lieberman, D. A. et al. Low rate of large polyps (>9 mm) within 10 years after an adequate baseline colonoscopy with no polyps. Gastroenterology 147, 343–350 (2014). · DOI
  124. Lansdorp-Vogelaar, I. et al. Personalizing age of cancer screening cessation based on comorbid conditions: Model estimates of harms and benefits. Ann. Intern. Med. 161, 104–112 (2014). · DOI
  125. van Hees, F. et al. Should colorectal cancer screening be considered in elderly persons without previous screening? Ann. Intern. Med. 160, 750–759 (2014). · doi:10.7326/m13-2263
  126. Hazewinkel, Y. et al. Prevalence of serrated polyps and association with synchronous advanced neoplasia in screening colonoscopy. Endoscopy 46, 219–224 (2014).
  127. IJspeert, J. E. G. et al. Development and validation of the WASP classification system for optical diagnosis of adenomas, hyperplastic polyps and sessile serrated adenomas/polyps. Gut http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308411 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  128. Jeffery, G. M., Hickey, B. E. & Hider, P. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 1, CD002200 (2002).
  129. Primrose, J. N. et al. Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial. JAMA 311, 263–270 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  130. Brenner, H. et al. Progress in colorectal cancer survival in Europe from the late 1980s to the early 21st century: the EUROCARE study. Int. J. Cancer 131, 1649–1658 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  131. Breugom, A. J. et al. Quality assurance in the treatment of colorectal cancer: the EURECCA initiative. Ann. Oncol. 25, 1485–1492 (2014). · DOI
  132. Van de Velde, C. J. H. et al. EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary management: European consensus conference colon & rectum. Eur. J. Cancer 50,1.e1–1.e34 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  133. Van de Velde, C. J. H. et al. Experts reviews of the multidisciplinary consensus conference colon and rectal cancer 2012: science, opinions and experiences from the experts of surgery. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 40, 454–468 (2014). A review of the EURECCA consensus on colorectal cancer surgery. · DOI
  134. Quirke, P., West, N. P. & Nagtegaal, I. D. EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colorectal cancer clinical management: the pathologists expert review. Virchows Arch. 464, 129–134 (2014). · doi:10.1007/s00428-013-1534-x
  135. Valentini, V. et al. EURECCA consensus conference highlights about rectal cancer clinical management: the radiation oncologist's expert review. Radiother. Oncol. 110, 195–198 (2014). · DOI
  136. Tudyka, V. et al. EURECCA consensus conference highlights about colon and rectal cancer multidisciplinary management: the radiology experts review. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 40, 469–475 (2014). · doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.029
  137. Van de Velde, C. J. H. et al. EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe. Eur. J. Cancer 49, 2784–2790 (2013). · DOI
  138. Rutten, H. J. T., den Dulk, M., Lemmens, V. E., van de Velde, C. J. H. & Marijnen, C. A. M. Controversies of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in elderly patients. Lancet Oncol. 9, 494–501 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  139. Gooiker, G. A. et al. Risk factors for excess mortality in the first year after curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 19, 2428–2434 (2012). · DOI
  140. Van den Broek, C. B. M. et al. The survival gap between middle-aged and elderly colon cancer patients. Time trends in treatment and survival. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 37, 904–912 (2011). · doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2011.06.013
  141. Dekker, J. W. T. et al. Cause of death the first year after curative colorectal cancer surgery; a prolonged impact of the surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 40, 1481–1487 (2014). · doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2014.05.010
  142. Mulder, S. A. et al. Prevalence and prognosis of synchronous colorectal cancer: a Dutch population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol. 35, 442–447 (2011). · DOI
  143. Taylor, F. G. M. et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of circumferential resection margin predicts disease-free survival and local recurrence: 5-year follow-up results of the MERCURY study. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 34–43 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  144. Veldkamp, R. et al. Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 6, 477–484 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  145. Bonjer, H. J. et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 1324–1332 (2015). A randomized trial with long-term follow-up, showing similar results for open and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. · DOI · Paper page
  146. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group et al. Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 10, 44–52 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  147. Chen, J. et al. Meta-analysis of temporary ileostomy versus colostomy for colorectal anastomoses. Acta Chir. Belg. 113, 330–339 (2013). · DOI
  148. Van Hooft, J. E. et al. Self-expandable metal stents for obstructing colonic and extracolonic cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy 46, 990–1053 (2014). · DOI
  149. Fiori, E. et al. Palliative management for patients with subacute obstruction and stage IV unresectable rectosigmoid cancer: colostomy versus endoscopic stenting: final results of a prospective randomized trial. Am. J. Surg. 204, 321–326 (2012). · DOI
  150. De Graaf, E. J. R. et al. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus total mesorectal excision of T1 rectal adenocarcinomas with curative intention. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 35, 1280–1285 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  151. Doornebosch, P. G. et al. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T1 rectal cancer: size matters! Surg. Endosc. 26, 551–557 (2011). · doi:10.1007/s00464-011-1918-4
  152. Lezoche, E. et al. Randomized clinical trial of endoluminal locoregional resection versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for T2 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. Br. J. Surg. 99, 1211–1218 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  153. Martin-Perez, B., Andrade-Ribeiro, G. D., Hunter, L. & Atallah, S. A systematic review of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) from 2010 to 2013. Tech. Coloproctol. 18, 775–788 (2014). · doi:10.1007/s10151-014-1148-6
  154. Nagtegaal, I. D., Marijnen, C. A. M., Kranenbarg, E. K., van de Velde, C. J. H. & van Krieken, J. H. Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 26, 350–357 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  155. Quirke, P. et al. Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet 373, 821–828 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  156. Heald, R. J., Husband, E. M. & Ryall, R. D. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery — the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br. J. Surg. 69, 613–616 (1982). · DOI · Paper page
  157. Ramji, K. M. et al. Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between robotic, laparoscopic, and open rectal cancer surgery: early experience at a tertiary care center. Surg. Endosc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4390-8 (2015). · doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4390-8
  158. Folkesson, J. et al. Swedish rectal cancer trial: long lasting benefits from radiotherapy on survival and local recurrence rate. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 5644–5650 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  159. Sebag-Montefiore, D. et al. Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet 373, 811–820 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  160. Van Gijn, W. et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol. 12, 575–582 (2011). A randomized trial showing that preoperative radiotherapy reduces local recurrence rates after TME surgery. · DOI · Paper page
  161. Pettersson, D. et al. Interim analysis of the Stockholm III trial of preoperative radiotherapy regimens for rectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 97, 580–587 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  162. Juul, T. et al. Low anterior resection syndrome and quality of life. Dis. Colon Rectum 57, 585–591 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  163. García, M. et al. Phase II study of preoperative bevacizumab, capecitabine and radiotherapy for resectable locally-advanced rectal cancer. BMC Cancer 15, 59 (2015). · DOI
  164. Beyond TME Collaborative. Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes. Br. J. Surg. 100, E1–E33 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  165. Habr-Gama, A., Perez, R. O., São Julião, G. P., Proscurshim, I. & Gama-Rodrigues, J. Nonoperative approaches to rectal cancer: a critical evaluation. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 21, 234–239 (2011). · DOI
  166. Maas, M. et al. Wait-and-see policy for clinical complete responders after chemoradiation for rectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 29, 4633–4640 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  167. Dalton, R. S. J. et al. A single-centre experience of chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: is there potential for nonoperative management? Colorectal Dis. 14, 567–571 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  168. Fujita, S. et al. Postoperative morbidity and mortality after mesorectal excision with and without lateral lymph node dissection for clinical stage II or stage III lower rectal cancer (JCOG0212): results from a multicentre, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 13, 616–621 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  169. Påhlman, L. et al. The Swedish rectal cancer registry. Br. J. Surg. 94, 1285–1292 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  170. Wibe, A. et al. Effect of hospital caseload on long-term outcome after standardization of rectal cancer surgery at a national level. Br. J. Surg. 92, 217–224 (2005). · doi:10.1002/bjs.4821
  171. Birkmeyer, J. D. et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 346, 1128–1137 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  172. Kehlet, H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br. J. Anaesth. 78, 606–617 (1997). · DOI · Paper page
  173. Kehlet, H. & Mogensen, T. Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br. J. Surg. 86, 227–230 (1999). · DOI · Paper page
  174. Lassen, K. et al. Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group recommendations. Arch. Surg. 144, 961–969 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  175. Boelens, P. G. et al. Reduction of postoperative ileus by early enteral nutrition in patients undergoing major rectal surgery. Ann. Surg. 259, 649–655 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  176. Glimelius, B., Tiret, E., Cervantes, A. & Arnold, D. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 24, vi81–vi88 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  177. Labianca, R. et al. Early colon cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 24, vi64–vi72 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  178. McCleary, N. J. et al. Impact of age on the efficacy of newer adjuvant therapies in patients with stage II/III colon cancer: findings from the ACCENT database. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 2600–2606 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  179. Van Cutsem, E., Cervantes, A., Nordlinger, B. & Arnold, D. Metastatic colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 25, iii1–iii9 (2014). European Society of Medical Oncology guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer. · DOI · Paper page
  180. Willett, C. G. et al. Direct evidence that the VEGF-specific antibody bevacizumab has antivascular effects in human rectal cancer. Nat. Med. 10, 145–147 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  181. Giantonio, B. J. et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 1539–1544 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  182. Van Cutsem, E. et al. Addition of aflibercept to fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan improves survival in a Phase III randomized trial in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 3499–3506 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  183. Tomlinson, J. S. et al. Actual 10-year survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases defines cure. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 4575–4580 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  184. Evrard, S. et al. Combined ablation and resection (CARe) as an effective parenchymal sparing treatment for extensive colorectal liver metastases. PLoS ONE 9, e114404 (2014). · DOI
  185. Ayez, N. et al. Outcome of microscopic incomplete resection (R1) of colorectal liver metastases in the era of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 19, 1618–1627 (2012). · DOI
  186. Benoist, S. et al. Complete response of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy: does it mean cure? J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 3939–3945 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  187. Simkens, L. H. J., Koopman, M. & Punt, C. J. A. Optimal duration of systemic treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 26, 448–453 (2014). · DOI
  188. Smith, J. J. & Weiser, M. R. Outcomes in non-metastatic colorectal cancer. J. Surg. Oncol. 110, 518–526 (2014). · DOI
  189. Juul, T. et al. International validation of the low anterior resection syndrome score. Ann. Surg. 259, 728–734 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  190. Feddern, M.-L., Jensen, T. S. & Laurberg, S. Chronic pain in the pelvic area or lower extremities after rectal cancer treatment and its impact on quality of life: a population-based cross-sectional study. Pain 156, 1765–1771 (2015). · DOI
  191. De Caluwé, L., Van Nieuwenhove, Y. & Ceelen, W. P. Preoperative chemoradiation versus radiation alone for stage II and III resectable rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2, CD006041 (2013).
  192. Bregendahl, S., Emmertsen, K. J., Lindegaard, J. C. & Laurberg, S. Urinary and sexual dysfunction in women after resection with and without preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: a population-based cross-sectional study. Colorectal Dis. 17, 26–37 (2015). · DOI
  193. Gilbert, A. et al. Systematic review of radiation therapy toxicity reporting in randomized controlled trials of rectal cancer: a comparison of patient-reported outcomes and clinician toxicity reporting. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 92, 555–567 (2015). · DOI
  194. Diouf, M. et al. Could baseline health-related quality of life (QoL) predict overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer? The results of the GERCOR OPTIMOX 1 study. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 12, 69 (2014). · doi:10.1186/1477-7525-12-69
  195. Otto, S. J. et al. Association of change in physical activity and body weight with quality of life and mortality in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support. Care Cancer 23, 1237–1250 (2015). · DOI
  196. Martínez, M. E. et al. One-year risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia: U. S. versus U. K. risk-stratification guidelines. Ann. Intern. Med. 157, 856–864 (2012). · DOI
  197. Gao, W., Gulliford, M., Bennett, M. I., Murtagh, F. E. M. & Higginson, I. J. Managing cancer pain at the end of life with multiple strong opioids: a population-based retrospective cohort study in primary care. PLoS ONE 9, e79266 (2014). · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0079266
  198. Zhong, S. et al. Association between physical activity and mortality in breast cancer: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 29, 391–404 (2014). · DOI
  199. Davies, R. J., Miller, R. & Coleman, N. Colorectal cancer screening: prospects for molecular stool analysis. Nat. Rev. Cancer 5, 199–209 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  200. Towler, B. P., Irwig, L., Glasziou, P., Weller, D. & Kewenter, J. Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, hemoccult. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2, CD001216 (2000).

200 of 204 shown

Cited by

See all 1,563

Metadata

Authors
Kuipers, E. J., Grady, W. M., Lieberman, D., Seufferlein, T., Sung, J. J., Boelens, P. G., van de Velde, C. J. H., & Watanabe, T.
Venue
Nature Reviews Disease Primers
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-11-05
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
15065-15065
ISSN
2056-676X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/nrdp.2015.65
OpenAlex
W4211001330
Cited by
1,563
References
23
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence

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: Colorectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrdp.2015.65
The paper
Kuipers, E. J., Grady, W. M., Lieberman, D., Seufferlein, T., Sung, J. J., Boelens, P. G., van de Velde, C. J. H., & Watanabe, T. (2015). Colorectal cancer. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2015.65

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.