↓ Skip to main content

Identification of Recurrence—Predictive Indicators in Stage I Colorectal Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Identification of Recurrence—Predictive Indicators in Stage I Colorectal Cancer
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00268-016-3833-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Ho Lee, Jong Lyul Lee, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim

Abstract

Patients with stage I colorectal cancer (CRC) rarely experience recurrences; therefore, few risk factors for recurrence are known. This study was designed to evaluate oncologic outcomes of patients with stage I CRC and to identify risk factors for recurrence after curative surgery. A retrospective cohort of 860 patients from a single institution who underwent curative surgery for stage I CRC between July 1995 and June 2010 was enrolled. Patients who were diagnosed with hereditary, synchronous, or metachronous cancer and those who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy were excluded. Patients from whom fewer than 12 lymph nodes were retrieved were also excluded. The 860 patients included 402 (46.7%) with colon tumors and 458 (53.3%) with rectal tumors. Thirty-five patients (4.1%) experienced recurrences; local and systemic recurrence rates were 1.1 and 3.0%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were 93.5 ± 0.8% and 95.7 ± 0.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) concentration ≥6 ng/mL (hazard ratio [HR] 3.354, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.373-8.195, p = 0.008) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (HR 2.676, 95% CI 1.097-6.531, p = 0.031) were independent risk factors for RFS. The overall recurrence rate among patients with stage I CRC after curative surgery was 4.1%. Elevated serum CEA and LVI were significantly associated with recurrence. Large-scale, multicenter studies are needed to confirm the prognostic value of these risk factors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 23%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Other 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 77%
Unspecified 3 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#876,543
of 12,691,444 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#140
of 2,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,010
of 259,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#10
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,691,444 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.