| Title |
Oncological outcomes of IBD-associated versus sporadic colorectal cancer in modern era: a matched case-control study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00384-018-3049-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antoine Thicoïpé, David Laharie, Denis Smith, Edouard Chabrun, Anne Rullier, Florian Poullenot, Eric Rullier, Quentin Denost |
| Abstract |
Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are associated with an increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). However and despite significant advances in the management of IBD and CRC, the prognosis of IBD-related CRC (IBD-CRC) remains controversial. The aim of the present case-control study was to compare the prognosis of IBD-CRC to sporadic CRC. Consecutive patients operated for IBD-CRC from 2004 to 2014 were recruited and matched with sporadic CRC (ratio 3:1) from the same center. Matching was performed on gender, tumor stage, and location and period of surgery. Endpoints were postoperative morbidity (Dindo-Clavien III-V), quality of surgery, and long-term oncological outcomes. Among 1498 CRC patients operated during the study period, 21 patients were identified with IBD-CRC and matched to 63 patients with sporadic CRC (S-CRC). Patients with IBD-CRC were significantly younger (p < 0.001), had multifocal lesions more frequently (p = 0.04), and undergone abdominoperineal excision and coloproctectomy more often (p = 0.001). Postoperative morbidity was not significantly different between the two groups (25 vs. 14%; p = 0.309), as well as the rate of R0 resection (86 vs. 95%; p = 0.162). Five-year disease-free and overall survival were 71 and 81% in patients with IBD-CRC and 69% (p = 0.801) and 78% (p = 0.845) in those with S-CRC, respectively. In a case-control study of patients operated for CRC within the last decade, the prognosis of cancer associated with IBD is similar to sporadic cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 25% |
| France | 2 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,110,240
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#277
of 1,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,582
of 326,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#11
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,832 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 326,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.