ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in colon cancer patients: a study protocol for emulating a target trial using cancer registry data.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this study is to compare the 5 year overall survival of patients with stage I-III colon cancer treated by laparoscopic colectomy versus open colectomy.
methodsUsing Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Cancer Registry data from 2008 to 2018, we will emulate a phase III, multicenter, open-label, two-parallel-arm hypothetical target trial in adult patients with stage I-III colon cancer who received laparoscopic or open colectomy as an elective treatment. An inverse-probability weighted Royston‒Parmar parametric survival model (RPpsm) will be used to estimate the hazard ratio of laparoscopic versus open surgery after confounding factors are balanced between the two treatment arms. Further to the hazard ratio, we will also compute differences in the absolute risk (at 1, 3, and 5 years) and restricted mean survival time (up to 1, 3, and 5 years). A weighted Kaplan‒Meier curve will be used to compare five-year overall survival in both treatment arms. Various comparator and sensitivity analyses will be performed to check the robustness of the results that will be estimated by the RPpsm main model. Treatment period- and stage-specific results will also be provided. DISCUSSION: This study aims to causally model the effect of laparoscopic versus open colectomy on 5 year overall survival using a target trial emulation approach. As the cancer registry data do not cover BMI, comorbidity, and previous abdominal surgery for non-malignant indications, the potential for residual confounding arising from these factors is a limitation of this study. This will be approached in a quantitative bias analysis using the E-method. The results will substantiate existing evidence on the comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in patients with stage I-III colon cancer and may guide clinical decisions as to whether a laparoscopic approach is as safe as an open approach in terms of improving 5-year overall survival in these patient groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.