The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer: a systematic review of risk factors providing rationale for therapy decisions
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Population screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is expected to increase the number of pT1 CRCs. Local excision is an attractive treatment option, but is only oncologically safe in the absence of lymph node metastasis (LNM). A systematic review of the predictive value of pathological risk factors for LNM in pT1 CRC was conducted to provide data for an evidence-based decision regarding follow-up or radical surgery after local excision. METHODS: PubMed was searched for reports on predictors of LNM in pT1 CRC. Published papers written in English and containing at least 50 patients were included. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.1. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were included involving a total of 3621 patients with available nodal status. The strongest independent predictors of LNM were lymphatic invasion (relative risk [RR] 5.2, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 4.0 - 6.8), submucosal invasion ≥ 1 mm (RR 5.2, 95 %CI 1.8 - 15.4), budding (RR 5.1, 95 %CI 3.6 - 7.3), and poor histological differentiation (RR 4.8, 95 %CI 3.3 - 6.9). Limitations of the study were: results could not be stratified according to location in the colon or rectum; very early tumors removed by polypectomy without surgical resection were not included in the meta-analysis; and included studies were primarily from Asian countries and results therefore need to be verified in Western populations. CONCLUSION: The absence of lymphatic invasion, budding, submucosal invasion ≥ 1 mm, and poor histological differentiation were each associated with low risk of LNM. Risk stratification models integrating these factors need to be investigated further.
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
Cites
Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood
Mandel, J. S., Bond, J. H., Church, T. R., Snover, D. C., Bradley, G. M., Schuman, L. M., & Ederer, F. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199305133281901 · Cited by 3,229
Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer
Hardcastle, J. D., Chamberlain, J. O., Robinson, M. H., Moss, S. M., Amar, S. S., Balfour, T. W., James, P. D., & Mangham, C. M. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03386-7 · Cited by 2,793
Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test
Kronborg, O., Fenger, C., Olsen, J., Jørgensen, O. D., & Søndergaard, O. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)03430-7 · Cited by 2,501
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Flat and Depressed Types of Early Colorectal Cancer
Kudo, S. (1993) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/s-2007-1010367 · Cited by 820
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
Haggitt, R. C., Glotzbach, R. E., Soffer, E. E., & Wruble, L. D. (1985) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/0016-5085(85)90333-6 · Cited by 747
Risk of Lymph Node Metastasis in T1 Carcinoma of the Colon and Rectum
Nascimbeni, R., Burgart, L. J., Nivatvongs, S., & Larson, D. R. (2002) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/s10350-004-6147-7 · Cited by 713
Management of early invasive colorectal cancer: Risk of recurrence and clinical guidelines
Kikuchi, R., Takano, M., Takagi, K., Fujimoto, N., Nozaki, R., Fujiyoshi, T., & Uchida, Y. (1995) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/bf02049154 · Cited by 675
Kitajima, K., Fujimori, T., Fujii, S., Takeda, J., Ohkura, Y., Kawamata, H., Kumamoto, T., Ishiguro, S., Kato, Y., Shimoda, T., et al. (2004) · Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1007/s00535-004-1339-4 · Cited by 663
Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia: possibility of standardization
Tanaka, S., Oka, S., Kaneko, I., Hirata, M., Mouri, R., Kanao, H., Yoshida, S., & Chayama, K. (2007) · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · doi:10.1016/j.gie.2007.02.032 · Cited by 447
Cited by
Lugli, A., Kirsch, R., Ajioka, Y., Bosman, F., Cathomas, G., Dawson, H., El Zimaity, H., Fléjou, J.-F., Hansen, T. P., Hartmann, A., et al. (2017) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/modpathol.2017.46 · Cited by 1,156
Self-citationArtificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy: general overview
El Hajjar, A., & Rey, J.-F. (2020) · Chinese Medical Journal · doi:10.1097/cm9.0000000000000623 · Cited by 102
Basile, D., Broudin, C., Emile, J. F., Falcoz, A., Pagès, F., Mineur, L., Bennouna, J., Louvet, C., Artru, P., Fratte, S., et al. (2022) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.03.002 · Cited by 47
Haasnoot, K. J. C., Backes, Y., Moons, L. M. G., Kranenburg, O., Trinh, A., Vermeulen, L., Noë, M., Tuynman, J. B., van Lent, A. U. G., van Ginneken, R., et al. (2020) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/s41379-020-0598-9 · Cited by 30
Loughrey, M. B. (2020) · Histopathology Reporting · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27828-1_6 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Bosch, S., Teerenstra, S., de Wilt, J., Cunningham, C., & Nagtegaal, I.
- Venue
- Endoscopy
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2013-07-24
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 827-841
- ISSN
- 0013-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1438-8812
- OpenAlex
- W1997709084
- Cited by
- 428
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 2.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Predicting lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer: a systematic review of risk factors providing rationale for therapy decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/s-0033-1344238
- The paper
- Bosch, S., Teerenstra, S., de Wilt, J., Cunningham, C., & Nagtegaal, I. (2013). Predicting lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer: a systematic review of risk factors providing rationale for therapy decisions. Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1344238
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.
