Cited by 31Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Role of Real-World Evidence in Informing Cancer Care: Lessons from Colorectal Cancer

Open access
Batra, A., Cheung, W.Y.·2019·Current Oncology

Abstract

The term “real-world evidence” (rwe) describes the analysis of data that are collected beyond the context of clinical trials. The use and application of rwe have become increasingly common and relevant, especially in oncology, because there is growing recognition that randomized controlled trials (rcts) might not be sufficiently representative of the entire patient population that is affected by cancer, and that specific clinical research questions might be best addressed by real-world data. In this brief review, our main aim is to highlight the role of rwe in informing cancer care, particularly focusing on specific examples from colorectal cancer. Our hope is to illustrate the ways in which rwe can complement rcts in improving the understanding of cancer management and how rwe can facilitate cancer treatment decisions for real-world patients encountered in routine clinical care.

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 · 10.3747/co.26.5625

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The improvement of overall survival has not been seen in the majority of real-world cohorts, except for patients with long-term survival who most likely have a particularly benign and treatment-responsive tumour biology.

    “This improvement of overall survival has not been seen in the majority of real-world cohorts, except for patients with long-term survival who most likely have a particularly benign and treatment-responsive tumour biology.1216”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [13]13. associated with underuse of palliative systemic therapy in elderly patients with metastatic colon cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2017;16:147-53.
  2. [17]17. Haller DG, O'Connell MJ, Cartwright TH, et al . Impact of age and medical comorbidity on adjuvant treatment outcomes for stage iii colon cancer. Ann Oncol 2015;26:715-24.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Batra, A., & Cheung, W. Y.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Cheung, W.Y.
Venue
Current Oncology
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-11-01
Volume
26
Issue
11
Pages
53-56
ISSN
  • 1198-0052 (ISSN-L)
  • 1718-7729
OpenAlex
W2990459257
Cited by
31
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
real-world evidence, colorectal cancer, real-world data, randomized controlled trials, cancer research
MeSH terms
Humans, Colorectal Neoplasms

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