| Title |
Evaluating the Prognostic Role of Elevated Preoperative Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels in Colon Cancer Patients: Results from the National Cancer Database
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-015-5014-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adan Z. Becerra, Christian P. Probst, Mohamedtaki A. Tejani, Christopher T. Aquina, Maynor G. González, Bradley J. Hensley, Katia Noyes, John R. Monson, Fergal J. Fleming |
| Abstract |
Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a reliable tumor marker for the management and surveillance of colon cancer. However, limitations in previous studies have made it difficult to elucidate whether CEA should be established as a prognostic indicator. This study examines the association between elevated preoperative CEA levels and overall survival in colon cancer patients using a national population-based registry. Stage I-III colon cancer patients were identified from the 2004-2006 National Cancer Database. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between elevated CEA levels and overall survival after controlling for important patient, hospital, and tumor characteristics. A Monte Carlo Markov Chain was used to impute the large degree of missing CEA data. All models controlled for the propensity score in order to account for selection bias. A total of 137,381 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 34 % of patients had an elevated CEA level and 66 % had a normal CEA level, with a median survival of 70 and 100 months, respectively. Patients with an elevated CEA level had a 62 % increase in the hazard of death (HR 1.62, 95 % CI 1.53-1.74) compared with patients with a normal CEA level. Preoperative CEA was an independent predictor of overall survival across all stages. The results support recommendations to include CEA levels as another high-risk feature that clinicians can use to counsel patients on adjuvant chemotherapy, especially for stage II patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,300,248
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#5,495
of 6,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#331,825
of 395,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#88
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,471 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 395,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.