Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,830

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Review of Microsatellite Instability and Colorectal Cancer Prognosis

Popat, S., Hubner, R., Houlston, R.S.·2005·Journal of Clinical Oncology
DOI 10.1200/jco.2005.01.086
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: A number of studies have investigated the relationship between microsatellite instability (MSI) and colorectal cancer (CRC) prognosis. Although many have reported a better survival with MSI, estimates of the hazard ratio (HR) among studies differ. To derive a more precise estimate of the prognostic significance of MSI, we have reviewed and pooled data from published studies. Methods: Studies stratifying survival in CRC patients by MSI status were eligible for analysis. The principal outcome measure was the HR. Data from eligible studies were pooled using standard techniques. Results: Thirty-two eligible studies reported survival in a total of 7,642 cases, including 1,277 with MSI. There was no evidence of publication bias. The combined HR estimate for overall survival associated with MSI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.71; heterogeneity P = .16; I 2 = 20%). This benefit was maintained restricting analyses to clinical trial patients (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.85) and patients with locally advanced CRC (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.78). In patients treated with adjuvant fluorouracil (FU) CRCs with MSI had a better prognosis (HR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.84). However, while data are limited, tumors with MSI derived no benefit from adjuvant FU (HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.14). Conclusion: CRCs with MSI have a significantly better prognosis compared to those with intact mismatch repair. Additional studies are needed to further define the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced tumors with MSI.

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 · 10.1200/jco.2005.01.086

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Popat, S., Hubner, R., & Houlston, R. S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Published
2005-01-20
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
609-618
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
DOI
10.1200/jco.2005.01.086
OpenAlex
W2123636561
Cited by
1,830
References
6
FWCI
5.83
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

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.