Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,026

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of Long-term Survival After Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multifactorial Model of 929 Patients

Rees, Myrddin, Tekkis, Paris P., Welsh, Fenella K.S., O'Rourke, Thomas, John, Timothy G.·2008·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors associated with cancer-specific survival and develop a predictive model for patients undergoing primary hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. BACKGROUND: No published studies investigated collectively the inter-relation of factors related to patient cancer-specific survival after hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Clinical, pathologic, and complete follow-up data were prospectively collected from 929 consecutive patients undergoing primary (n = 925) or repeat hepatic resection (n = 80) for colorectal liver metastases at a tertiary referral center from 1987 to 2005. Parametric survival analysis was used to identify predictors of cancer-specific survival and develop a predictive model. The model was validated using measures of discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 1.5% and 25.9%, respectively. 5-year and 10-year cancer-specific survival were 36% and 23%. On multivariate analysis, 7 risk factors were found to be independent predictors of poor survival: number of hepatic metastases >3, node positive primary, poorly differentiated primary, extrahepatic disease, tumor diameter > or =5 cm, carcinoembryonic antigen level >60 ng/mL, and positive resection margin. The first 6 of these criteria were used in a preoperative scoring system and the last 6 in the postoperative setting. Patients with the worst postoperative prognostic criteria had an expected median cancer-specific survival of 0.7 years and a 5-year cancer-specific survival of 2%. Conversely, patients with the best prognostic postoperative criteria had an expected median cancer-specific survival of 7.4 years and a 5-year cancer-specific survival of 64%. When tested both predictive models fitted the data well with no significant differences between observed and predicted outcomes (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Resection of liver metastases provides good long-term cancer-specific survival benefit, which can be quantified pre- or postoperatively using the criteria described. The "Basingstoke Predictive Index" may be used for risk-stratifying patients who may benefit from intensive surveillance and selection for adjuvant therapy and trials.

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 · 10.1097/sla.0b013e31815aa2c2

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,026

Metadata

Authors
Rees, M., Tekkis, P. P., Welsh, F. K. S., O'Rourke, T., & John, T. G.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2008-01
Volume
247
Issue
1
Pages
125-135
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007900522
Cited by
1,026
References
1
FWCI
23.56
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: Evaluation of Long-term Survival After Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multifactorial Model of 929 Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e31815aa2c2
The paper
Rees, M., Tekkis, P. P., Welsh, F. K. S., O'Rourke, T., & John, T. G. (2008). Evaluation of Long-term Survival After Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multifactorial Model of 929 Patients. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e31815aa2c2

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.