The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Tumour `budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer
Abstract
Tumour `budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer Aims: Although the characteristic of invasive pattern which contributes to Jass's classification is a sensitive prognostic marker in rectal cancer, reproducibility of its assessment has been shown to be problematic. As another histological parameter of invasive margin, we examined the prognostic significance of tumour ‘budding’ and attempted to establish its appropriate criteria. Methods and results: A total of 638 rectal cancer specimens was examined. We defined tumour `budding' as an isolated single cancer cell or a cluster composed of fewer than five cancer cells. We divided these into two groups by their intensity, i.e. the number of `budding' foci within a microscopic field of × 250. Rectal cancer with high‐grade `budding' (≥ 10 foci in a field) was observed in 30.1% of patients, and was associated with lower 5‐year survival rates (40.7%) than patients with low‐grade `budding' (84.0%) (P < 0.0001). Based on multivariate analysis, tumour `budding' was selected as the significant independent variable, together with the number of nodes involved, extramural spread, lymphocytic infiltration, apical nodal involvement and tumour differentiation. Kappa coefficient of two‐graded tumour `budding' in the intraobserver study was 0.84. Conclusions: Because of its value as a prognostic indicator and its reproducibility, tumour `budding' would be a good index to estimate the aggressiveness of rectal cancer.
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
Risk factors for an adverse outcome in early invasive colorectal carcinoma
Ueno, H., Mochizuki, H., Hashiguchi, Y., Shimazaki, H., Aida, S., Hase, K., Matsukuma, S., Kanai, T., Kurihara, H., Ozawa, K., et al. (2004) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2004.04.022 · Cited by 758
Self-citationTo differentiate or not — routes towards metastasis
Brabletz, T. (2012) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc3265 · Cited by 623
Zlobec, I., & Lugli, A. (2010) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.199 · Cited by 331
New Criteria for Histologic Grading of Colorectal Cancer
Ueno, H., Kajiwara, Y., Shimazaki, H., Shinto, E., Hashiguchi, Y., Nakanishi, K., Maekawa, K., Katsurada, Y., Nakamura, T., Mochizuki, H., et al. (2012) · American Journal of Surgical Pathology · doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e318235edee · Cited by 227
Self-citationDe Smedt, L., Palmans, S., Andel, D., Govaere, O., Boeckx, B., Smeets, D., Galle, E., Wouters, J., Barras, D., Suffiotti, M., et al. (2017) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.382 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Ueno, H., Murphy, J., Jass, J. R., Mochizuki, H., & Talbot, I. C.
- Venue
- Histopathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-01-28
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 127-132
- ISSN
- 0309-0167 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2559
- OpenAlex
- W1983532504
- Cited by
- 655
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.84
- 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: Tumour `budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2559.2002.01324.x
- The paper
- Ueno, H., Murphy, J., Jass, J. R., Mochizuki, H., & Talbot, I. C. (2002). Tumour `budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer. Histopathology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2559.2002.01324.x
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.