MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171374737 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0000000000002164

Classic and Novel Histopathologic Risk Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis in T1 Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3171374737 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Dykstra, Tamara I. Gimon, Paul E. Ronksley, W. Donald Buie, Anthony R. MacLean

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerMeta-analysisLymph node metastasisSurgical oncologyOncologyLymph nodeCancerInternal medicineMetastasisGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Treatment of endoscopically resected T1 colorectal cancers is based on the risk of lymph node metastasis. Risk is based on histopathologic features, although there is lack of consensus as to what constitutes high-risk features. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of histopathologic risk factors for lymph node metastasis. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane controlled register of trials for risk factors for lymph node metastasis was performed from inception until August 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Included patients must have had an oncologic resection to confirm lymph node status and reported at least 1 histopathologic risk factor. INTERVENTION: Rates of lymph node positivity were compared between patients with and without risk factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We report the results of the meta-analysis as ORs. RESULTS: Of 8592 citations, 60 met inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses found that lymphovascular invasion, vascular invasion, neural invasion, and poorly differentiated histology were significantly associated with lymph node metastasis, as were depths of 1000 µm (OR = 2.76), 1500 µm (OR = 4.37), 2000 µm (OR = 2.37), submucosal level 3 depth (OR = 3.08), and submucosal level 2/3 (OR = 3.08) depth. Depth of 3000 µm, Haggitt level 4, and widths of 3000 µm and 4000 µm were not significantly associated with lymph node metastasis. Tumor budding (OR = 4.99) and poorly differentiated clusters (OR = 14.61) were also significantly associated with lymph node metastasis. LIMITATIONS: Included studies reported risk factors independently, making it impossible to examine the additive metastasis risk in patients with numerous risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 1500 μm as the depth most significantly associated with lymph node metastasis. Novel factors tumor budding and poorly differentiated clusters were also significantly associated with lymph node metastasis. These findings should help inform guidelines regarding risk stratification of T1 tumors and prompt additional investigation into the exact contribution of poorly differentiated clusters to lymph node metastasis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207