Colorectal Cancer

On this page

Quick Reference

RxDrug of choicemFOLFOX6 (Adjuvant Stage III); Pembrolizumab (First-line MSI-H metastatic)

AltAlternativesCAPOX (Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin); FOLFIRI + Bevacizumab (Metastatic)

⊘AvoidAnti-EGFR therapy (Cetuximab) in RAS-mutated or BRAF-mutated tumors

DxTest of choiceColonoscopy (Diagnosis); Pelvic MRI (Rectal staging)

ScKey scoreAJCC TNM Staging (8th/9th Edition); MSI/MMR status

→When to referDiagnosis of T1 cancer with high-risk features; suspected Lynch/FAP; metastatic disease for multidisciplinary review

Colorectal cancer management requires early screening starting at age 45, universal molecular profiling, and a combination of oncologically precise surgery and risk-adapted systemic therapy.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant neoplastic disease arising from the epithelial lining of the colon or rectum, representing the third most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. While historically a disease of older adults, there is a significant global rise in early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) in patients under age 50, often associated with obesity and distinct molecular profiles. Management has shifted from a one-size-fits-all surgical approach to a precision-medicine paradigm.

Overview and Recommendations

Background

•Recognize colorectal cancer (CRC) as a heterogeneous malignancy primarily manifesting as adenocarcinoma, originating from the glandular epithelium of the large intestine. It typically follows the adenoma-carcinoma sequence, driven by the accumulation of genetic mutations in the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, or the serrated pathway characterized by BRAF mutations and CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP).
•Identify the three primary molecular pathways: Chromosomal Instability (CIN), which accounts for 85% of sporadic cases; Microsatellite Instability (MSI), resulting from deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) seen in or sporadic MLH1 silencing; and the CIMP pathway. These pathways dictate tumor behavior, prognosis, and sensitivity to modern immunotherapies.
•Distinguish between anatomical subtypes, as right-sided (proximal) tumors often present with different molecular profiles and worse prognoses compared to left-sided (distal) tumors. Rectal cancer, defined as occurring within 15 cm of the anal verge, requires distinct management strategies due to the narrow pelvic anatomy and the necessity of preserving sphincter function.
•Screen for high-risk populations, including those with (Ulcerative Colitis or Crohn’s), hereditary syndromes like (FAP), or a significant family history. Emerging risk factors include central obesity, maternal obesity (intergenerational risk), and specific microbial signatures such as Fusobacterium nucleatum and Clostridioides difficile.
•Monitor the shifting epidemiology toward early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC). Patients diagnosed before age 50 often present with more advanced stages and distal lesions, necessitating a lower threshold for diagnostic workup in symptomatic young adults who might otherwise be misdiagnosed with benign conditions like .

Evaluation

•Suspect colorectal cancer in any adult presenting with iron-deficiency anemia, unexplained weight loss, or persistent changes in bowel habits such as new-onset constipation or 'pencil-thin' stools. Right-sided lesions often present with occult bleeding and fatigue, while left-sided lesions are more likely to cause overt and obstructive symptoms.
•Ask specifically about the duration of symptoms, as the clinical nadir typically occurs 2 to 4 months before presentation. Inquire about a family history of colorectal or endometrial cancers to screen for using the Amsterdam II or Bethesda criteria.
•Examine the patient thoroughly, starting with a mandatory digital rectal examination (DRE) to assess for low-lying rectal masses, fixation to surrounding tissues, and sphincter tone. Perform abdominal palpation to check for masses, hepatomegaly (suggestive of liver metastases), or (suggestive of peritoneal carcinomatosis).
•Order a high-quality as the gold standard for diagnosis. Utilize computer-aided detection (CADe) systems where available to maximize the adenoma detection rate (ADR). If colonoscopy is incomplete or contraindicated, consider Computed Tomographic Colonography (CTC) or colon capsule endoscopy.
•Obtain a tissue biopsy for histopathological confirmation and universal molecular testing. Every new diagnosis must be tested for mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2) via immunohistochemistry or for microsatellite instability (MSI) via PCR to guide immunotherapy and identify hereditary risks.
•Perform systemic staging using contrast-enhanced CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to identify distant metastases. For rectal cancer, obtain a high-resolution pelvic MRI to assess the circumferential resection margin (CRM), extramural venous invasion (EMVI), and the depth of invasion relative to the mesorectal fascia.
•Measure baseline serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA) levels. While not useful for screening due to low sensitivity, an elevated baseline CEA is a prognostic marker and serves as a vital tool for monitoring recurrence following curative-intent treatment.
•Evaluate nutritional and inflammatory status using indices like the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) or the Systemic Immune-inflammation Index (SII). Low albumin and high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios are independent predictors of poor surgical outcomes and reduced overall survival.
•Rule out paraneoplastic syndromes in atypical cases. For example, Erythema gyratum repens (a 'wood-grain' skin rash) or the sudden appearance of multiple seborrheic keratoses (Leser-Trélat sign) may be the first clinical indication of an underlying colonic malignancy.
•Consider genetic counseling and germline multigene panel testing (MGPT) for all patients diagnosed under age 50 or those with tumor testing suggestive of a hereditary syndrome, regardless of family history.

Management

•Initiate a multimodal prehabilitation program 2–4 weeks prior to elective surgery. This should include structured aerobic and resistance exercise, nutritional optimization, and psychological support to improve physiological reserve and reduce postoperative complications.
•Perform surgical resection as the primary curative modality for localized disease. For colon cancer, execute a (CME) with central vascular ligation. For rectal cancer, (TME) is the gold standard to ensure the removal of the intact mesorectal envelope.
•Utilize minimally invasive platforms, such as robotic-assisted surgery, particularly for complex rectal dissections. Robotic surgery is associated with lower conversion rates to open surgery and better visualization in the narrow male pelvis compared to conventional laparoscopy.
•Administer adjuvant chemotherapy for Stage III colon cancer to eradicate micrometastases. The standard regimen is mFOLFOX6 (Oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², Leucovorin 400 mg/m², and 5-FU 2400 mg/m² infusion) for 3 to 6 months depending on risk stratification (IDEA trial criteria).
•Optimize the timing of adjuvant therapy, especially in patients with lymph-vascular invasion (LVI). Initiating chemotherapy within 3.2 weeks of surgical resection is associated with significantly improved overall survival.
•Implement Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT) for locally advanced rectal cancer. This involves delivering both chemotherapy (e.g., FOLFOX) and chemoradiotherapy (50.4 Gy with concurrent capecitabine) prior to surgery to increase pathological complete response (pCR) rates and facilitate organ preservation.
•Prescribe Pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks as the first-line standard of care for patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer, as established by the KEYNOTE-177 trial.
•Select targeted agents for metastatic disease based on RAS and BRAF status. For RAS wild-type, left-sided tumors, use anti-EGFR therapy (Cetuximab or Panitumumab). For RAS-mutated or right-sided tumors, combine chemotherapy with anti-VEGF therapy (Bevacizumab 5 mg/kg).
•Treat BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic disease with the combination of Encorafenib 300 mg daily plus Cetuximab, which has shown superior survival outcomes in the second-line setting compared to standard chemotherapy.
•Monitor for treatment-related toxicities, such as oxaliplatin-induced . Consider duloxetine 30–60 mg daily for established neuropathy or non-invasive magnetic field therapy for persistent pain.
•Manage high-output stomas (HOS) aggressively in the early postoperative period to prevent dehydration and electrolyte imbalances. Monitor stoma output daily; outputs exceeding 1500 mL/day require medical intervention with antimotility agents and oral rehydration solutions.
•Refer patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases for evaluation of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with Mitomycin C 30 mg/m² at specialized centers.
•Follow a rigorous surveillance protocol post-resection: CEA testing every 3–6 months, annual CT scans of the chest/abdomen/pelvis, and colonoscopy at 1 year, then every 3–5 years based on findings.
•Incorporate liquid biopsy (ctDNA) monitoring where available to detect molecular residual disease (MRD). Post-surgical ctDNA positivity is a highly specific predictor of recurrence and may guide the intensification of adjuvant therapy.
•Avoid routine follow-up colonoscopy immediately after uncomplicated unless 'alarm' symptoms (anemia, weight loss) are present or the patient is over age 50 and overdue for screening.
•Refer all patients with suspected hereditary syndromes to a specialized genetics clinic for cascade testing of biological relatives to prevent future cancers in the family.

Board Review — High Yield

•Apple core lesion — Classic radiographic appearance of a constricting colorectal carcinoma on barium enema.
•Streptococcus gallolyticus (bovis) — Bacteremia or endocarditis with this organism is highly associated with underlying colorectal neoplasia; mandatory colonoscopy required.
•Lynch Syndrome — Autosomal dominant germline mutation in MMR genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2); associated with proximal colon cancer and endometrial cancer.
•FAP (Familial Adenomatous Polyposis) — APC gene mutation on chromosome 5q; results in thousands of polyps and 100% cancer risk by age 40 if untreated.
•CEA (Carcinoembryonic Antigen) — Tumor marker used for monitoring recurrence, not for screening; high preoperative levels correlate with poor prognosis.
•Turcot Syndrome — Association of hereditary polyposis with CNS tumors (medulloblastoma or glioblastoma).
•Gardner Syndrome — FAP variant with extra-colonic manifestations including osteomas, desmoid tumors, and sebaceous cysts.
•Microsatellite Instability (MSI-H) — Predicts excellent response to PD-1 inhibitors (Pembrolizumab) but poor response to 5-FU monotherapy in Stage II.

Deep Dive — Evidence Details

Epidemiology and Risk Factors

▸CRC represents more than 10% of the global cancer burden, with increasing incidence reported in China and sub-Saharan Africa. [276,280,284]
▸EOCRC is defined as CRC diagnosed before **age 50 years**; adenoma, polyp, and serrated-lesion detection increased with age among adults aged 18–44 years. [273,277]
▸Important associated risk domains include smoking, alcohol, physical inactivity, BMI, metabolic syndrome, NAFLD/MASLD, and hypertension. [272,276,279,281]
▸Lynch syndrome and deficient mismatch repair identify genetically or molecularly distinct high-risk groups requiring risk-adapted management. [274,277]
▸Prior non-CRC cancer and inadequate follow-up after a positive stool test may increase preventable CRC morbidity through delayed detection. [267,275]

CP Clinical Pearl: Risk assessment should integrate age, family or hereditary risk, prior cancer, metabolic health, lifestyle, and access to completed screening rather than relying on a single factor. [266,274-277,279-281]

! Warning: Associations reported for hypertension, metabolic syndrome, NAFLD/MASLD, and prior cancer are largely observational; they support risk stratification but do not establish that any one exposure independently causes CRC or that modification prevents cancer. [271,272,275,279,281]

Global and age-related epidemiology

Colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for more than 10% of the global cancer burden, and its incidence is increasing in several regions, including China and sub-Saharan Africa. ^[276]^[280]^[284] In Nigeria, more than half of patients reportedly die within 1 year of diagnosis, reflecting late presentation and limited access to treatment; consequently, identification of locally relevant risk factors is particularly important where screening is not readily available. ^[284]

CRC is predominantly a disease of older adults, but early-onset disease is an important and increasing phenomenon. Early-onset CRC (EOCRC) is defined in the supplied literature as diagnosis before age 50 years, and increasing incidence has been reported worldwide, including in China. ^[277] In a Chinese colonoscopy-based cohort of adults aged 18–44 years, detection rates for polyps, adenomas, and serrated lesions all increased with age, with statistically significant age-related trends; metabolic risk factors were specifically examined among participants aged 40–44 years. ^[273] These findings support attention to risk assessment before the age traditionally used for population screening, although the study was single-center and colonoscopy-based and therefore does not establish population incidence. ^[273]

The population requiring decisions about screening and surveillance is expanding. The United States population aged ≥65 years is projected to reach 82 million by 2050, representing approximately 23% of the population and growing five times faster than the total population. ^[266] In older adults, the potential benefit of detecting and removing premalignant colorectal lesions must be balanced against life expectancy, comorbidity, procedural risk, and the time required to realize a preventive benefit; cessation of screening or surveillance may therefore be appropriate when time to benefit is limited. ^[266]

Established and emerging risk factors

Behavioral and socioeconomic exposures remain important determinants of CRC incidence. A pooled Finnish cohort of 224,048 participants, including 2,006 incident CRC cases, evaluated education, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and body mass index (BMI), demonstrating the importance of examining incidence trends according to social and behavioral risk profiles rather than relying on a single dominant risk factor. ^[276] The study emphasizes that no single risk factor accounts for most CRC cases. ^[276] A multicenter Nigerian case-control study evaluated 13 risk factors previously identified in high-income populations to assess whether their associations were transferable to the Nigerian population; regional differences in clinicodemographic characteristics and tumor features make direct extrapolation uncertain. ^[284]

Metabolic disease is increasingly relevant. In a UK Biobank cohort of 379,173 adults aged 40–69 years, metabolic syndrome (MetS), the number of metabolic abnormalities, and individual MetS components were assessed in relation to CRC incidence, with analyses stratified by sex and by age <60 versus ≥60 years. ^[279] This design reflects potential heterogeneity in the MetS–CRC association according to age and sex, although the supplied abstract does not provide the effect estimates. ^[279]

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), now commonly termed metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), is associated with increased colorectal polyp or neoplasia risk in the supplied studies. ^[271]^[281] A 2026 meta-analysis identified candidate risk factors for colorectal polyps among patients with NAFLD and used them to develop a prediction model. ^[271] In patients with MASLD who had undergone an index and surveillance colonoscopy, longitudinal reduction in cardiometabolic risk factors was examined in relation to metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia, addressing whether metabolic improvement might modify subsequent neoplasia risk. ^[281] These studies support metabolic health as a potentially modifiable component of risk assessment, but their observational or model-development designs do not prove that metabolic optimization prevents CRC. ^[271]^[281]

Hypertension may also contribute to risk. Two large Japanese cohort datasets were used to compare CRC incidence in normotensive and hypertensive individuals, with propensity-score matching and competing-risk analysis; the study reported a high incidence of CRC among Japanese individuals with hypertension. ^[272] Because the supplied abstract does not state the adjusted effect size or fully characterize treatment-related findings, hypertension should be regarded as an associated cardiometabolic factor rather than an established sole cause of CRC. ^[272]

Genetic, prior-cancer, and premalignant conditions

Lynch syndrome is a hereditary CRC-predisposition syndrome caused by germline pathogenic variants in DNA mismatch-repair genes. ^[274] In an English National Health Service registry of 4,732 mismatch-repair pathogenic-variant carriers followed from 2010–2022, surveillance frequency, adherence to national colonoscopy guidance, and age-specific CRC incidence and mortality were evaluated. ^[274] The study directly addresses the effect of surveillance among carriers, reinforcing that Lynch syndrome warrants risk-based colonoscopic surveillance distinct from average-risk screening. ^[274]

Mismatch-repair deficiency also appears relevant to EOCRC biology. In a Chinese single-center series of 23,414 colorectal neoplasia cases, 4,159 CRC cases with complete immunohistochemical assessment of MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6 were analyzed; deficient mismatch repair was characterized as a distinct molecular feature of EOCRC. ^[277]

People who have survived another primary cancer may have elevated subsequent CRC risk. A retrospective Alberta cohort included adults with non-CRC cancer diagnosed from 2000–2021 who survived at least 6 months and compared subsequent CRC incidence with that of the cancer-free population across primary cancer site, sex, age, survivorship period, stage, histology, and anatomic subsite. ^[275] These findings support consideration of tailored prevention and screening strategies for cancer survivors, although the magnitude of risk varies by the original cancer and survivor characteristics. ^[275]

Screening-related epidemiology

A positive stool-based screening test identifies a population at increased risk of CRC and requires timely diagnostic colonoscopy. ^[267] Follow-up colonoscopy remains suboptimal, and barriers include patient, system, and access-related factors; navigation, digital tools, coordinated care, and open-access colonoscopy are proposed interventions to reduce missed diagnoses and CRC mortality. ^[267] In rural populations in northern China, CRC screening awareness and participation were described as inadequate, underscoring the contribution of geographic and socioeconomic inequities to observed disease burden. ^[280]

Risk domains supported by the supplied evidence

Risk domain	Evidence and clinical relevance
Age	CRC burden is substantial in older adults; decisions about screening cessation should consider life expectancy, comorbidity, and time to benefit. ^[266]
Early age	EOCRC is diagnosed before 50 years; precursor-lesion detection rises across ages 18–44. ^[273]^[277]
Lifestyle and social factors	Education, smoking, alcohol, physical inactivity, and BMI were evaluated in a large Finnish pooled cohort. ^[276]
Cardiometabolic disease	Metabolic syndrome, its components, NAFLD/MASLD, and hypertension were associated with CRC, polyps, or advanced neoplasia in the supplied observational studies. ^[271]^[272]^[279]^[281]
Hereditary/molecular risk	Lynch syndrome results from germline mismatch-repair variants; deficient mismatch repair is a distinct EOCRC feature. ^[274]^[277]
Previous cancer	Survivors of non-CRC cancers may have elevated subsequent primary CRC risk and may require tailored prevention. ^[275]
Access and follow-up	Rural awareness and participation may be inadequate; incomplete colonoscopy follow-up after a positive stool test leaves a major diagnostic gap. ^[267]^[280]

Etiology and Triggering Factors

▸Lynch syndrome is caused by germline pathogenic variants in DNA mismatch-repair genes and is a major inherited susceptibility state for CRC. [274]
▸Microbiome findings are reported at the adenoma and CRC stages, but cross-sectional and diagnostic studies cannot reliably distinguish cause from consequence. [295][297][298][300]
▸Antibiotic exposure has been associated with gastrointestinal and colorectal cancer risk, although confounding and heterogeneous exposure definitions limit causal certainty. [292]
▸Intratumoral or oral–gut Fusobacterium signals are biologically plausible in CRC, but prognostic or biomarker associations do not prove tumour initiation. [293][294]
▸Early-onset CRC is being investigated in relation to salivary microbiome and age-associated genomic characteristics, without evidence from the supplied studies of a single definitive trigger. [290][301]
▸Inflammatory mediators such as CCL2 may reflect CRC-associated immune remodelling; they are not established primary causes. [296]
▸Aspirin modifies risk in LS prevention studies and should be distinguished from etiological factors. [287]

HY High Yield: The clearest established etiological factor in the supplied evidence is inherited MMR deficiency in Lynch syndrome; microbiome, antibiotic, inflammatory, and metabolic findings should be presented as associated or potentially modifying factors unless prospective causal evidence is available. [274][288][292][295]

! Warning: Microbiome signatures and Fusobacterium detection may reflect existing adenoma, CRC, tumour stage, geography, or host context. Diagnostic accuracy or prognostic association must not be equated with proof of carcinogenic initiation. [290][293][295][297][298][300]

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is etiologically heterogeneous and arises through interactions among inherited susceptibility, tumour-specific molecular alterations, host factors, environmental exposures, inflammation, and the intestinal microbiome. The available evidence supports several biologically plausible contributors, but many microbiome, antibiotic, dietary, and metabolic associations remain observational and should not be interpreted as proven initiating causes.

Inherited susceptibility and mismatch-repair deficiency

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a major inherited cause of CRC and results from germline pathogenic variants in DNA mismatch-repair (MMR) genes. Defective MMR permits accumulation of replication errors and microsatellite instability, thereby increasing susceptibility to colorectal neoplasia. ^[274] LS-associated risk varies by the affected MMR gene and by demographic and clinical factors; a systematic review and meta-analysis specifically evaluated genotype, demographic characteristics, and other risk factors for adenoma, advanced adenoma, serrated lesions, and CRC development, although pooled detection rates and risk estimates were heterogeneous. ^[288]

The clinical relevance of inherited predisposition is illustrated by universal tumour screening: immunohistochemical assessment of MMR proteins in stage II/III CRC, followed by BRAF V600E testing and genetic counselling or germline testing when indicated, can identify patients with possible LS. ^[289]^C This approach is primarily a case-finding strategy rather than a cause of CRC, but it demonstrates that MMR deficiency is an important etiological and familial-risk marker. ^[289]^C

Age and early-onset disease

Age is a major host determinant of CRC risk, although the supplied studies do not establish a single age-specific mechanism. ^[288] Rising incidence of early-onset CRC has prompted investigation of oral and intestinal microbial alterations as potential contributors or biomarkers. ^[290] In a prospective study of 65 patients with early-onset CRC and 63 controls, salivary microbiome profiles were assessed by 16S rRNA sequencing and machine-learning models were developed to distinguish cases from controls; these findings support diagnostic potential but do not prove that salivary dysbiosis initiates cancer. ^[290] In a targeted genomic analysis of relapsed or refractory CRC from the NCI-MATCH study, 43 patients aged 18–39 years were compared with 759 patients aged 40 years or older; the study examined age-associated genomic characteristics rather than identifying a definitive cause of early-onset CRC. ^[301]^D

Intestinal microbiome and microbial carcinogenesis

The gut microbiome is increasingly implicated in CRC through possible effects on epithelial integrity, immune regulation, inflammation, genotoxicity, and tumour-promoting metabolism. ^[295]^[298] Across 578 metagenomic samples from five geographically distinct cohorts, a multi-kingdom model identified 12 bacterial, 18 viral, and 1 fungal marker associated with CRC discrimination; geographic and environmental variation nevertheless limits inference about universal causal organisms. ^[295] A separate cross-sectional study found different microbial and serum-metabolite profiles among healthy controls, non-metastatic CRC, and metastatic CRC, including enrichment of Enterocloster clostridioformis and Lactobacillus crispatus in metastatic disease; because the design was cross-sectional, these changes may reflect tumour burden or treatment-independent disease effects rather than triggers. ^[298]

Microbial differences have also been reported at the adenoma stage. In a metagenomic study of 60 patients with colorectal adenoma and 30 healthy controls, 487 genes differed significantly between groups, with approximately 55.37% enriched in the adenoma group; these results support a possible role for microbial functional alteration during the adenoma–carcinoma sequence but require prospective validation. ^[297] In treatment-naive CRC patients from Western Siberia, gut microbial community composition differed from that of 45 healthy controls, with enrichment of Proteobacteria, Fusobacteria, Fusobacterium, Bacteroides fragilis, and other taxa; regional microbiome structure may limit generalisability. ^[300]

Fusobacterium, particularly F. nucleatum, is a leading candidate microbial onco-pathogen in CRC. ^[293]^[294] Intratumoral detection of Fusobacterium in stage I–III resectable CRC was investigated as a prognostic biomarker in a multicentre cohort, including assessment of recurrence and survival outcomes; prognostic association does not by itself establish a role in tumour initiation. ^[293] Reviews and cohort-based evidence also describe F. nucleatum as an oral anaerobe linked mechanistically with CRC and potentially relevant to an oral–gut axis. ^[294]

Antibiotic exposure and microbiome disruption

Antibiotic use may influence CRC risk by disrupting microbial community structure, metabolic functions, and mucosal immune homeostasis. ^[292] A systematic review and meta-analysis reported modest but generally consistent associations between antibiotic exposure and gastrointestinal cancer, including CRC, while emphasising limitations related to exposure definitions, study design, confounding, and variation between antibiotic classes. ^[292] Accordingly, antibiotic exposure should be considered a possible modifying factor rather than a confirmed direct carcinogen. ^[292]

Inflammation, immunity, and metabolic context

Chronic inflammation and immune remodelling are biologically relevant to CRC development, particularly in the microbiome-rich intestinal environment. ^[296] In a study of 52 CRC patients and 44 healthy controls, circulating inflammatory mediators were measured, and CCL2 was investigated as a marker of monocyte recruitment, tumour-associated macrophage biology, and CRC-associated inflammatory remodelling; its diagnostic association does not establish that CCL2 is an initiating trigger. ^[296] Differences in serum metabolites accompanying distinct CRC stages further support interaction between tumour biology, host metabolism, and microbial activity. ^[298]

Dietary components and interventions capable of altering microbial composition or function are plausible modifiers of CRC biology, but the supplied clinical trial of the metabiotic Del-Immune V involved only 39 patients undergoing surgery and evaluated perioperative microbiome restructuring and patient-reported outcomes, not primary cancer causation. ^[299]^C Similarly, aspirin is a preventive modifier in genetically predisposed individuals rather than an etiological factor: in LS, CAPP2 previously showed that 600 mg daily reduced CRC and all LS-associated cancers, while CaPP3 compared 100 mg and 300 mg daily with 600 mg to assess lower-dose non-inferiority. ^[287]

Detection, surveillance, and apparent risk

Colonoscopy and artificial-intelligence-assisted detection do not cause CRC, but detection intensity influences observed neoplasia rates. ^[286]^[288] In LS surveillance, CADLY2 evaluated whether computer-aided detection improves adenoma detection and assessed computer-aided optical differentiation of lesions; the trial addresses ascertainment and prevention through lesion removal rather than primary etiology. ^[286] National English surveillance data from 4,732 MMR carriers evaluated adherence and the association of surveillance with CRC incidence and mortality, reinforcing that surveillance can modify clinically observed outcomes in a genetically high-risk population. ^[274]

Overall, the strongest established etiological signal in the supplied evidence is inherited MMR deficiency in LS. Microbial dysbiosis, Fusobacterium, antibiotic exposure, inflammatory signalling, metabolic alterations, and factors associated with early-onset disease are biologically plausible or epidemiologically associated contributors, but their independent causal roles remain incompletely defined. ^[288]^[290]^[292]^[293]^[295]^[296]^[297]^[298]^[300]^[301]^D

Etiological and modifying factors supported by the supplied evidence

Factor	Evidence and interpretation
Germline MMR pathogenic variants	Established inherited susceptibility in Lynch syndrome. ^[274]^[289]^C
Age and early-onset phenotype	Important host context; microbiome and genomic correlates remain under investigation. ^[288]^[290]^[301]^D
Gut and salivary microbiome	Associated microbial and functional signatures; causality remains uncertain. ^[290]^[295]^[297]^[298]^[300]
Fusobacterium species	Candidate onco-pathogen and prognostic biomarker; initiation is unproven. ^[293]^[294]
Antibiotic exposure	Modest association with gastrointestinal cancer in meta-analysis; residual confounding is possible. ^[292]
Inflammation and CCL2	Marker of immune remodelling and possible tumour-supportive inflammation, not an established initiating cause. ^[296]
Diet, metabiotics, and prevention	May alter microbiota or risk, but the supplied perioperative trial does not establish primary causation. ^[299]^C
Aspirin	Preventive modifier studied in LS, including 600 mg, 300 mg, and 100 mg daily regimens. ^[287]

Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology

▸dMMR/MSI-H and pMMR/MSS status is a central molecular division with major implications for immune-checkpoint sensitivity.[304][305][309][316]
▸TAM polarization, T-cell exhaustion, antigen-presentation defects and myeloid suppression contribute to immune resistance and are potential therapeutic targets.[304][320]
▸Early-onset CRC has distinct genomic, transcriptomic and epigenetic features compared with later-onset disease.[307]
▸Cell-cycle disruption involving Rb–E2F, NF-κB, JAK–STAT and Hippo–YAP is implicated in colitis-associated carcinogenesis.[322]
▸Rare ALK fusions and PI4K/PIPK alterations illustrate the importance of broad genomic profiling for biomarker-directed treatment.[317][319]
▸ctDNA-based molecular residual disease assessment may refine relapse-risk stratification after curative-intent treatment.[320]
▸CRC-associated microbial virulence factors and metabolic functions may be more informative than taxonomy alone in explaining carcinogenesis.[321]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: Determine MMR/MSI status in CRC because dMMR/MSI-H biology is associated with distinct immune behavior and guides checkpoint-inhibitor treatment selection.[304][309][316]

HY High Yield: Resistance is not uniform: dMMR/MSI-H immunotherapy failure may be intrinsic at first assessment or adaptive after an initial response, and progression may be single-organ or systemic.[313]

Molecular heterogeneity and disease subtypes

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is biologically heterogeneous, with clinically actionable variation in mismatch-repair (MMR) status, microsatellite instability (MSI), oncogenic drivers, tumor-suppressor alterations, immune contexture and metastatic biology.^[307]^[311]^[315] The most clinically consequential molecular distinction is between mismatch-repair-deficient (dMMR)/MSI-high (MSI-H) and mismatch-repair-proficient (pMMR)/microsatellite-stable (MSS) disease.^[304]^[305]^[309]^[316] dMMR/MSI-H tumors are characterized by defective DNA repair and have increased susceptibility to immune-checkpoint blockade, whereas most CRCs are pMMR/MSS and derive little or no benefit from currently available immunotherapy regimens.^[304] Nevertheless, primary resistance and acquired progression remain biologically important in dMMR/MSI-H disease; in a retrospective series of 166 immunotherapy-treated patients, progression was classified as intrinsic when present at the first restaging scan or adaptive when occurring after initial stable or responding disease, and as single-organ or systemic.^[313]

Genomic, epigenetic and signaling alterations

Early-onset CRC (diagnosed before age 50) is increasingly regarded as a distinct biological entity rather than simply an earlier presentation of late-onset CRC, with differences reported in genomic and transcriptomic profiles, epigenetic alterations and dysregulated signaling pathways.^[307] Established molecular markers used in clinical practice include MSI/MMR status, KRAS and BRAF, while the prognostic significance of p53 and PTEN—particularly when assessed by immunohistochemistry—remains incompletely defined.^[311] A retrospective cohort of 103 resected colorectal adenocarcinomas specifically evaluated p53 expression and PTEN deficiency in relation to clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis, supporting continued investigation of these tumor-suppressor pathways.^[311]

Rare actionable genomic events broaden the molecular spectrum. ALK fusions are uncommon in CRC but represent potential oncogenic drivers and therapeutic targets; comprehensive hybrid-capture sequencing of 56,206 advanced CRC tumors was used to define their prevalence, clinicogenomic context, MSI/MMR status, tumor mutational burden and ancestry associations.^[319]^D PI4K and PIPK-family alterations have also been examined across 18 solid-tumor types using whole-exome data from 2,144 Chinese patients, integrated with TCGA genomic and transcriptomic datasets to explore relationships with survival, gene expression and the immune microenvironment.^[317]^C These findings position uncommon kinase alterations as candidate biomarkers requiring molecular profiling rather than histology alone.^[317]^C^[319]^D

Cell-cycle dysregulation and inflammation

In colitis-associated carcinogenesis, chronic inflammation is linked to disruption of the core cell-cycle network.^[322]^D Single-cell omics summarized in the reviewed evidence indicate that malignant CRC cells are predominantly in the G2/M phase, whereas epithelial cells in inflammatory bowel disease may show G1 arrest or excessive proliferation, suggesting that cell-cycle abnormalities arise during the premalignant inflammatory state.^[322]^D The Rb–E2F, NF-κB, JAK–STAT and Hippo–YAP pathways jointly regulate this process, together with cyclins D1, A2 and B1, cyclin-dependent kinases and inhibitors including p21, p27 and p57.^[322]^D

Tumor microenvironment and immune escape

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are a major component of the CRC tumor microenvironment and occupy a continuum between pro-inflammatory M1-like and anti-inflammatory, immunosuppressive M2-like states.^[304] Their polarization may modulate immune-checkpoint efficacy and is particularly relevant to the immunotherapy-refractory pMMR/MSS majority.^[304] The broader immune-escape process includes immune editing, tumor-microenvironment remodeling, T-cell exhaustion, impaired antigen presentation and myeloid suppression.^[320]^D Molecular residual disease after curative-intent therapy is therefore viewed as dynamic biology rather than solely a clinicopathological risk state; circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is being used to identify patients at increased relapse risk and refine adjuvant-treatment decisions.^[320]^D

The inflammatory microenvironment is also therapeutically targetable. Preclinical evidence suggests that cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibition can modulate inflammatory tumor biology and augment PD-1 blockade; the PICC-2 randomized phase 2 trial therefore evaluated neoadjuvant toripalimab plus celecoxib against toripalimab alone in locally advanced dMMR/MSI-H CRC.^[306] Similarly, the phase 3 COMMIT trial tested whether chemotherapy and vascular endothelial growth-factor inhibition could synergize with PD-L1 blockade in first-line dMMR/MSI-H metastatic CRC, a setting in which nearly half of patients receiving single-agent PD-1 therapy may progress within 12 months.^[305]

Microbiome, invasion and metastasis

CRC-associated microorganisms may contribute through virulence factors and functional metabolic pathways rather than taxonomy alone; the proposed “virulome-over-taxonomy” framework emphasizes that the same organism may have different effects at different carcinogenic stages and that one metabolic pathway may produce divergent host responses.^[321]^D This expands the conventional driver–passenger model of microbial carcinogenesis.^[321]^D

Metastatic CRC, particularly colorectal liver metastases, reflects substantial biological heterogeneity: recurrence after treatment of liver metastases exceeds 60%, and integrated genomic-clinical profiling is being investigated to guide resection and highly selected liver transplantation.^[315] Molecular determinants are also relevant in locally recurrent rectal cancer, where recurrence after radical salvage surgery may reach 50%; a molecular-era scoping review has evaluated blood, tissue and other biomarkers for postoperative oncologic outcomes.^[323]^D Sporadic synchronous multiple primary CRCs may show lesion-specific molecular diversity: in a study of 46 patients with synchronous tumors versus 202 with solitary CRC, MSI was assessed separately in each lesion using PCR-based testing.^[318] Japanese registry data from 1,464 patients across 25 institutions were used to characterize MSI-H/dMMR prevalence and clinicopathological features in resectable CRC.^[312] MSI status has additionally been investigated in relation to peripheral hemoglobin after adjustment for sex, age, tumor location, stage and nutritional or inflammatory covariates in 400 patients with stage II–III CRC.^[314]

Therapeutic implications of molecular biology

The molecular phenotype directly informs treatment selection. Multiple phase 3 trials and systematic reviews compare first-line immune-checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, assessing progression-free and overall survival and clinically relevant subgroups.^[309]^[316] Tissue-agnostic biomarker treatment is expanding across solid tumors, but efficacy interpretation is affected by assay variability, control-arm rigor, non-proportional hazards and resistance determinants.^[308]^C In MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, trifluridine/tipiracil retains a biological rationale because trifluridine showed activity in 5-fluorouracil-refractory dMMR CRC cell lines; a multicenter retrospective study evaluated trifluridine/tipiracil with or without bevacizumab in this population.^[310] Overall, CRC pathophysiology is best understood as an interaction among genomic instability, oncogenic signaling, inflammatory and immune ecology, microbiome-derived virulence, and evolving therapy-resistant cellular states.^[304]^[307]^[320]^D^[321]^D^[322]^D

Major molecular domains in CRC pathophysiology

Domain	Evidence-supported biological relevance
MMR/MSI	Defines an immune-responsive dMMR/MSI-H subgroup and an immunotherapy-refractory pMMR/MSS majority.^[304]^[309]^[316]
Tumor suppressors	p53 and PTEN are established investigational prognostic markers, but their immunohistochemical prognostic value remains incompletely defined.^[311]
Cell cycle and inflammation	Rb–E2F, NF-κB, JAK–STAT and Hippo–YAP signaling integrate inflammatory and cell-cycle dysregulation.^[322]^D
Immune microenvironment	TAM polarization, T-cell exhaustion, antigen-presentation status and myeloid suppression influence immune escape and treatment response.^[304]^[320]^D
Microbiome	Virulence factors and metabolic pathways may explain stage-specific microbial effects beyond taxonomic associations.^[321]^D
Metastatic biology	Genomic heterogeneity is being integrated with clinical variables to select patients for liver surgery or transplantation.^[315]

Diagnosis and Workup

▸Colonoscopy permits direct visualization, biopsy, and polypectomy and remains the reference investigation for suspected CRC. [325]
▸PillCam COLON 2 is an evaluated alternative for direct colonic visualization, but it cannot replace tissue acquisition or therapeutic colonoscopy when these are required. [325]
▸CAD has been assessed for polyps of any size, **≤5 mm**, and **6–9 mm**, but it is an adjunct and does not establish malignancy histologically. [333]
▸Organized FIT screening in the Basque Country targeted adults aged **50–69 years** and was associated with CRC-mortality evaluation at the population level. [338]
▸Rectal-cancer pathology should document total mesorectal excision completeness and circumferential resection-margin status. [324]
▸KRAS subtype analysis may inform response assessment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. [331]
▸In the FIND trial, positive ctDNA triggered immediate CT, whereas negative testing used **bimonthly CT**, **quarterly ctDNA**, and de-escalation after **two consecutive negative results**. [329]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: A suspected CRC diagnosis requires a pathway capable of obtaining tissue when malignancy must be confirmed; capsule endoscopy and CAD are visualization or detection technologies and do not substitute for biopsy or histopathology. [325][333]

CP Clinical Pearl: In rectal cancer, the workup should remain connected to high-quality pathological assessment: total mesorectal excision completeness and circumferential resection-margin status are key outcome measures. [324]

! Warning: ctDNA-guided surveillance schedules described in the FIND trial—**bimonthly CT**, **quarterly ctDNA**, and imaging de-escalation after **two consecutive negative results**—are trial-specific and should not automatically replace locally recommended surveillance. [329]

Scope of the diagnostic workup

The diagnostic pathway for colorectal cancer (CRC) should establish whether colorectal neoplasia is present, obtain tissue confirmation when feasible, define the anatomic extent of disease, and provide pathological and molecular information relevant to treatment and follow-up. The evidence supplied here evaluates colon visualization, screening implementation, computer-assisted polyp detection, rectal-cancer operative pathology, molecular response prediction, and postoperative surveillance rather than replacing a complete clinical assessment. ^[325]^[329]

Detection and direct visualization

Colonoscopy remains the reference investigation for patients with symptoms suggestive of CRC because it permits direct mucosal inspection, polyp removal, and biopsy during the same procedure. ^[325] Colon capsule endoscopy using PillCam COLON 2 has been evaluated as a less invasive alternative for direct visualization of the colon, particularly where colonoscopy is delayed, unacceptable, or incomplete. The systematic review and economic evaluation assessed its clinical effectiveness, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness for detecting colorectal polyps and CRC; the evidence should therefore be interpreted as an alternative-detection strategy, not as a replacement for therapeutic colonoscopy when biopsy or polypectomy is required. ^[325]

Computer-aided detection (CAD) is an adjunct to colonoscopic examination rather than an independent diagnostic pathway. A 2026 meta-analysis assessed CAD accuracy for colorectal polyps of any size and specifically for lesions ≤5 mm and 6–9 mm, using pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve, diagnostic odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. ^[333] These outcomes support evaluation of CAD as a tool to improve polyp recognition, but the available evidence does not establish that CAD alone confirms malignancy or removes the need for histopathological examination. ^[333]

Screening and access

Organized fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening is an important population-level route to CRC detection. In a population-based cohort from the Basque Country, Spain, an organized FIT program initiated in 2009 targeted adults aged 50–69 years, and CRC-specific mortality was evaluated from 2004–2024; people younger than 50 years served as a nonscreened reference group. ^[338] These findings address mortality associations at the program level and should not be interpreted as evidence that a negative FIT excludes CRC in a symptomatic patient. ^[338]

Screening completion is influenced by access and navigation. The CORC randomized trial evaluated remotely delivered patient navigation to increase colonoscopy completion among rural and underserved patients, while the SMARTER CRC pragmatic trial implemented mailed FIT with navigation for follow-up colonoscopy among rural Medicaid enrollees. ^[330]^[335] Qualitative analysis identified health-plan–clinic partnerships and practice facilitation as implementation strategies for overcoming rural barriers. ^[335] Rural recruitment research also used ZIP-code rurality, Rural-Urban Commuting Area, and Rural-Urban Continuum Code classifications, demonstrating that geographic definition is relevant when assessing representativeness and access in CRC research. ^[330]

Pathological assessment and rectal cancer staging information

For rectal adenocarcinoma, operative pathology provides clinically important quality and staging information. The ALaCaRT and ACOSOG Z6051 randomized trials enrolled patients with cT1–3 N0–2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma and evaluated pathological success using completeness or near-completeness of total mesorectal excision and circumferential resection-margin status, among other components. ^[324] These measures illustrate that diagnostic and staging workup must be linked to assessment of resection quality, particularly in rectal cancer, where the circumferential margin and total mesorectal excision specimen are central pathological endpoints. ^[324]

Molecular characterization may refine prognostic and treatment assessment. A meta-analysis examined whether KRAS mutation status and mutation location, including exon 2 versus mutations outside exon 2, were associated with pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. ^[331] KRAS testing should therefore be viewed as a potential treatment-response stratifier in the appropriate rectal-cancer setting, not as a standalone diagnostic test for CRC. ^[331]

Post-resection surveillance and emerging biomarkers

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is being evaluated for surveillance after curative resection of nonmetastatic CRC. In the prospective randomized phase III FIND trial, ctDNA-guided surveillance triggered immediate CT imaging after a positive methylation-based ctDNA result; patients with negative results continued bimonthly CT plus quarterly ctDNA testing, with imaging returning to standard frequency after two consecutive ctDNA-negative results. ^[329] This protocol tests whether dynamic ctDNA monitoring increases curative-intent treatment for recurrence and should not be generalized beyond the studied surveillance context without consideration of local guidelines and assay validation. ^[329]

Other emerging biomarkers, including tumoral Siglec-15 expression, tumor-associated macrophage profiles, and tertiary lymphoid-structure features, have been studied primarily for prognosis or recurrence prediction rather than initial CRC diagnosis. ^[332]^[339]^[340] Their reported roles remain investigational for routine diagnostic workup. ^[332]^[339]^[340]

Diagnostic and workup evidence

Domain	Evidence-supported role	Key limitation
Colonoscopy	Direct visualization, biopsy, and polypectomy ^[325]	Invasive and may involve delays or acceptability barriers ^[325]
Colon capsule endoscopy	Alternative direct visualization with PillCam COLON 2 ^[325]	Does not provide biopsy or polypectomy ^[325]
CAD	Adjunctive detection of colorectal polyps, including ≤5 mm and 6–9 mm lesions ^[333]	Does not replace histopathology ^[333]
FIT screening	Population-level early detection strategy; Basque program targeted 50–69 years ^[338]	A screening test is not a definitive symptomatic-patient workup ^[338]
Rectal-cancer pathology	Assesses total mesorectal excision and circumferential margin quality ^[324]	Applies to operative/pathological assessment rather than initial detection ^[324]
ctDNA surveillance	Dynamic postoperative recurrence monitoring in nonmetastatic CRC ^[329]	Trial-based strategy requiring assay and protocol validation ^[329]

Differential Diagnosis

▸Diverticulitis and CRC may overlap clinically and radiologically; CT is essential for confirming diverticulitis, but post-recovery colonoscopy is recommended after complicated disease and considered after uncomplicated disease with alarm symptoms or incomplete CRC screening. [342]
▸Perforated diverticulitis may conceal malignancy, and preoperative CT should not be treated as definitive when findings are indeterminate. [343]
▸Crohn disease can cause false-positive FIT-sDNA results through inflammation-related mucosal turnover; algorithm-enhanced stool DNA testing is investigational triage, not a replacement for biopsy. [345]
▸Colitis cystica profunda is a benign, predominantly distal lesion that can closely mimic CRC and requires histologic confirmation. [346]
▸Serrated lesions may be difficult to classify reliably even under simplified WHO criteria, warranting expert pathology review in consequential cases. [351]
▸IDA is associated with both malignant and nonmalignant gastrointestinal disease, so anemia alone does not establish CRC. [135][354]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: Do not assume that diverticulitis, IBD, or a benign rectal lesion excludes CRC. Persistent alarm symptoms, complicated diverticulitis, unexplained IDA, or an indeterminate mass require endoscopic and histologic assessment. [135][342][343][346]

CP Clinical Pearl: A negative or equivocal CT examination in perforated diverticulitis does not definitively exclude an underlying colonic malignancy. [343]

Overview

Colorectal cancer (CRC) should be considered when symptoms, laboratory abnormalities, endoscopic findings, or cross-sectional imaging suggest a structural colorectal lesion. Important mimics include diverticulitis, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), benign inflammatory or developmental lesions, serrated polyps, and other causes of iron-deficiency anemia (IDA). Because several of these disorders can produce overlapping symptoms or mass-like abnormalities, the differential diagnosis generally requires correlation of clinical presentation, CT, colonoscopy, and histopathology. Colonoscopy is a key diagnostic and therapeutic investigation for colorectal cancer, polyps, bleeding disorders, and other colorectal diseases. ^[145]

Diverticulitis

Acute diverticulitis commonly overlaps with CRC because both may cause abdominal pain, altered bowel habits, rectal bleeding, systemic inflammation, or focal colonic wall thickening. CT is considered essential to confirm diverticulitis, particularly at the first presentation and in severe disease. ^[342] An apparent episode of diverticulitis may therefore represent, coexist with, or obscure an underlying malignancy, especially when the course is atypical or alarm features persist. ^[342]^[355]^[356]

After recovery, colonoscopy is recommended for complicated diverticulitis and is suggested after uncomplicated diverticulitis when alarm symptoms are present or when the patient is not up to date with CRC screening. ^[342] Increasing age and male sex were associated with higher CRC risk in an exploratory post-diverticulitis model, supporting risk-based consideration of endoscopic assessment rather than assuming that all post-diverticulitis symptoms are benign. ^[356] A separate retrospective cohort developed and internally validated a nomogram for predicting histologically confirmed CRC risk after diverticulitis, but its retrospective, single-center design means that it should be regarded as exploratory rather than a replacement for guideline-directed evaluation. ^[355]

Preoperative CT may not reliably exclude malignancy in perforated diverticulitis. In the SCANDIV secondary analysis, CT examinations were independently reviewed by specialist abdominal radiologists to assess colonic malignancy and fecal contamination, with findings compared with operative reports; the study specifically addressed the risk of undetected cancers and contamination affecting treatment decisions. ^[343] Thus, suspected perforated diverticulitis with an indeterminate or suspicious lesion requires operative, endoscopic, and histologic correlation rather than reliance on CT alone. ^[343]

Crohn disease and other inflammatory bowel disease

Crohn disease (CD) and CRC share clinical manifestations, making noninvasive discrimination difficult in symptomatic high-risk patients. ^[345] FIT-sDNA may produce false-positive results in CD because inflammation increases mucosal cellular turnover. ^[345] An algorithm-enhanced FIT-sDNA system integrated demographic variables with fecal KRAS mutation, BMP3/NDRG4/SDC2 methylation, and fecal calprotectin to improve differentiation of CRC from CD; this approach remains a studied triage system and does not replace colonoscopy with biopsy. ^[345]

IBD is also clinically relevant because it is a major risk factor for CRC, so active inflammation and cancer may coexist rather than represent mutually exclusive diagnoses. ^[358] Symptoms attributed to IBD that are new, progressive, disproportionate to inflammatory activity, or associated with anemia or a focal lesion should therefore prompt assessment for dysplasia or CRC. ^[353]^[358]

Benign rectal and colorectal lesions

Colitis cystica profunda (CCP) is an uncommon benign colorectal lesion that can mimic malignancy clinically, radiologically, and endoscopically. ^[346] In a systematic review of 92 histologically confirmed patients, the mean age was 40 ± 12 years, and 54% were male. ^[346] The most frequent manifestations were rectal bleeding (70%), mucus discharge (32%), diarrhea (24%), and abdominal or rectal pain (26%); 12% were asymptomatic. ^[346] Lesions were predominantly distal, with 61% involving the rectum, and were often superficial or deep mass-like abnormalities that require histologic confirmation. ^[346]

Serrated polyps are another important pathologic differential, particularly when distinguishing premalignant sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) from hyperplastic polyps (HPs). Even after the 2019 WHO criterion requiring at least one unequivocally architecturally distorted serrated crypt, intraobserver and interobserver variability remains substantial in difficult cases. ^[351] Expert gastrointestinal pathology review may therefore be necessary when a serrated lesion has implications for cancer risk, surveillance, or interpretation of an apparently malignant or dysplastic specimen. ^[351]

Iron-deficiency anemia and occult gastrointestinal disease

IDA may be the presenting abnormality of CRC, but it is not specific for malignancy. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the prevalence of normal findings, individual nonmalignant gastrointestinal diseases, and malignancy among adults with confirmed IDA undergoing endoscopic investigation. ^[135] Nonmalignant upper- and lower-gastrointestinal pathology must therefore remain in the differential, even when CRC is being excluded. ^[135] Endoscopic assessment has also been studied in women younger than 50 years with IDA, including premenopausal women, for whom the evidence supporting investigation has historically been weaker than in postmenopausal women. ^[354]

Imaging and histologic distinctions within suspected CRC

Once a colorectal malignancy is identified, imaging may be used to characterize rather than exclude competing diagnoses. Dual-layer spectral CT parameters and lymph-node morphology have been investigated to distinguish metastatic from nonmetastatic lymph nodes in CRC, but these findings remain staging tools and do not establish the primary diagnosis without tissue correlation. ^[349] Rectal MRI metrics have been explored for differentiating well/moderately differentiated from poorly differentiated rectal tumors, and MRI-based nomograms have been developed to distinguish mucinous from nonmucinous rectal adenocarcinoma; these are subtype-classification models rather than validated substitutes for biopsy. ^[352]^[357]

Practical diagnostic approach

A suspicious colorectal lesion should be evaluated with colonoscopy and biopsy when feasible, while CT is particularly important when diverticulitis or perforation is suspected. ^[145]^[342]^[343] Persistent alarm symptoms after diverticulitis, unexplained IDA, atypical IBD activity, or a mass-like rectal lesion should not be attributed to a benign diagnosis without appropriate endoscopic and histologic confirmation. ^[135]^[342]^[346]^[354] Associations between infectious organisms such as Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis and CRC development remain investigational and should not be used as diagnostic criteria. ^[358] Surgical approach studies, postoperative psychological outcomes, ERAS comparisons, and robotic-emergency-surgery reviews inform treatment or perioperative care rather than the differential diagnosis itself. ^[344]^C^[347]^C^[348]^[350] Epidemiologic and survival data from single-center CRC cohorts likewise do not establish diagnostic discrimination. ^[359]^C

Principal mimics and discriminating considerations

Differential diagnosis	Features overlapping with CRC	Key discriminator or next step
Diverticulitis	Pain, altered bowel habits, inflammation, focal wall thickening	CT confirmation; post-recovery colonoscopy according to complication status, alarm symptoms, and screening history. ^[342]
Perforated diverticulitis	Perforation, inflammatory mass, possible fecal contamination	CT may miss malignancy; correlate with operative findings and subsequent histology. ^[343]
Crohn disease/IBD	Diarrhea, pain, bleeding, inflammatory mucosal changes, positive stool tests	Colonoscopy with biopsy; interpret FIT-sDNA cautiously because inflammation may cause false positives. ^[345]^[353]
Colitis cystica profunda	Rectal bleeding, mucus, pain, diarrhea, mass-like distal lesion	Histopathology is required to distinguish benign CCP from malignancy. ^[346]
Serrated lesion or hyperplastic polyp	Abnormal polypoid mucosa and possible dysplasia-related concern	Expert pathology review may be needed because SSL and HP interpretation remains variable. ^[351]
Other gastrointestinal disease causing IDA	Occult blood loss or anemia without specific colorectal symptoms	Endoscopic investigation must assess both malignant and nonmalignant causes. ^[135]^[354]

Management: Surgical and Local Therapies

▸High-quality TME and CRM clearance remain the defining surgical priorities in rectal cancer. [324][361][363]
▸Laparoscopic proctectomy is an accepted alternative to open surgery, but long-term oncological comparisons require interpretation from the planned individual-patient-data meta-analysis. [324]
▸Robotic and transanal TME may offer technical or functional advantages in selected patients, but neither has established universal oncological superiority over laparoscopy. [328][361][363]
▸Completion TME after local excision may be avoidable in selected **high-risk pT1** and **low-risk pT2** cancers when multidisciplinary organ-preservation protocols are used. [365]
▸CME for right-sided colon cancer remains controversial and should be implemented with specialist training and audit. [366]

HY High Yield: Technique does not substitute for oncological quality: the preferred operation is the approach that reliably achieves complete resection, negative margins, adequate nodal clearance, and acceptable function in the hands of a trained team. [324][361][363]

! Warning: Evidence for robotic, transanal, fluorescence-guided, reduced-port, and organ-preserving strategies is heterogeneous or centre-dependent; avoid presenting feasibility, biomarker changes, or technical advantages as definitive survival benefit. [328][362][365][371][374][375]

Principles of oncological resection

Surgery remains the principal local treatment for resectable colorectal adenocarcinoma, with the operative objective of complete tumour removal, adequate lymphadenectomy, and preservation of an intact specimen; in rectal cancer, total mesorectal excision (TME) quality and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status are central pathological indicators of resection quality. ^[324]^[361]^[363] Operative planning should integrate tumour site, stage, relationship to the mesorectal fascia and sphincter complex, anticipated functional outcome, comorbidity, and local expertise. ^[324]^[328]^[363]

For right-sided colon cancer, standard high-quality right hemicolectomy is established, whereas complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation is a proposed refinement rather than an unequivocally mandatory technique; the ACPGBI position statement identifies continuing uncertainty regarding oncological benefit, technical complexity, training, and service delivery. ^[366] CME should therefore be adopted within appropriately trained teams and audited pathways rather than applied as an unqualified universal requirement. ^[366]

Open, laparoscopic, robotic, and transanal rectal surgery

Laparoscopic proctectomy is an accepted minimally invasive alternative to open surgery when performed by an experienced team and when oncological and technical requirements can be met. ^[324]^[364] The individual-patient-data meta-analysis of the ALaCaRT and ACOSOG Z6051 randomized trials was specifically designed to assess long-term recurrence and survival after laparoscopic versus open proctectomy in cT1–3 N0–2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma, because neither original trial was individually powered for these long-term outcomes. ^[324] In early-onset low rectal cancer, defined as age <50 years, the LASRE post-hoc analysis compared laparoscopic and open surgery with late-onset disease as a comparator, addressing whether the potentially more aggressive biology of younger-onset cancer alters the relative effectiveness of the approaches. ^[364]

Robotic TME may improve pelvic dissection ergonomics and technical control, particularly in mid- and low-rectal tumours, but its oncological superiority over laparoscopy remains uncertain. ^[361]^[363] Randomized-trial evidence has evaluated resection quality, CRM positivity, and early oncological outcomes, while broader pathological meta-analysis has assessed complete TME and CRM- and distal-resection-margin positivity. ^[361]^[363] Robotic surgery should consequently be considered an approach-dependent option, not a replacement for high-quality TME or a guarantee of better cancer control. ^[361]^[363]

The transition to robotic practice requires structured training and quality monitoring. ^[368]^[377]^C A systematic review of more than 3,500 procedures described a triphasic learning curve, with the initial 1–25 cases characterized by longer operating times and reported conversion rates of 1.0–3.2%, followed by stabilization of technical proficiency by approximately case 35 in the included studies. ^[368] A separate specialized-centre analysis used cumulative-sum methods in 60 consecutive robotic cases, including 21 rectal procedures, to examine procedure- and tumour-location-specific learning. ^[377]^C Single-centre transition data and a prospective reduced-port study suggest feasibility, but these lower-level data should not be interpreted as proof of superiority. ^[371]^[374]^C

Transanal TME is another specialized option for selected mid- and low-rectal cancers. ^[328] In the multicentre randomized Ta-LaTME study, long-term quality of life, bowel function, and oncological outcomes were compared with laparoscopic TME using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires and the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score at baseline and at ≥12 months. ^[328] The approach should be restricted to teams with appropriate expertise because functional preservation and oncological safety must both be demonstrated. ^[328]

Anastomosis and intraoperative adjuncts

After TME, reconstruction may use immediate handsewn anastomosis, delayed Turnbull–Cutait anastomosis, double-stapling, or transanal techniques. ^[360] A Bayesian network meta-analysis combining randomized and non-randomized evidence was undertaken because pairwise comparisons alone have not established a comprehensive ranking of these methods. ^[360] Choice should therefore be individualized according to anastomotic height, tissue perfusion, tension, technical feasibility, sphincter function, and leak risk; no single technique can be declared universally preferred from the cited evidence. ^[360]

Robotic surgery has been associated with altered postoperative systemic inflammatory-response markers in comparative meta-analysis, but biochemical differences should not be equated automatically with improved oncological outcomes. ^[362] Indocyanine-green near-infrared fluorescence is an investigational intraoperative adjunct for lymphatic mapping and dissection precision; in a propensity-matched cohort of stage II–III colon cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy with D3 lymphadenectomy, 62 patients received fluorescence guidance and 65 did not. ^[375]

Local excision and organ preservation

Local excision can avoid the morbidity of radical rectal surgery in carefully selected early cancers, but adverse pathological features may indicate residual mesorectal disease and traditionally prompt completion TME. ^[365] The TESAR phase 3 randomized non-inferiority trial evaluated adjuvant chemoradiotherapy as an organ-preserving alternative to completion TME after local excision of high-risk pT1 and low-risk pT2 rectal cancer below the sigmoid takeoff. ^[365] This strategy requires multidisciplinary selection, accurate pathological risk assessment, informed discussion of recurrence risk and salvage options, and intensive surveillance; it should not be generalized to unselected rectal cancers. ^[365]

For locally advanced disease requiring resection beyond standard TME, pelvic exenteration may be considered in specialist centres, although perioperative morbidity is substantial. ^[373] Retrospective evidence indicates that perioperative inflammatory biomarkers, including C-reactive protein, albumin, modified Glasgow Prognostic Score, and neutrophil measures, are being evaluated as predictors of complications in exenterative surgery. ^[373] Recurrence-mapping research after TME has also examined whether the distal mesorectum requires inclusion in preoperative radiotherapy target volumes, but its retrospective design means that target-volume reduction should not be adopted without protocolized validation. ^[370]

Pediatric colorectal lymphoma is biologically and clinically distinct from typical colorectal adenocarcinoma and is outside the standard adenocarcinoma resection pathway; the available pediatric systematic review emphasizes diagnostic rarity and distinct surgical implications. ^[372] Similarly, short-course radiotherapy-based total neoadjuvant therapy with or without tislelizumab concerns neoadjuvant systemic treatment rather than a surgical or local-therapy technique and should be considered within multidisciplinary rectal-cancer protocols. ^[367]

Practical selection

The safest approach is one that achieves an intact, margin-negative specimen with an appropriate lymph-node harvest while minimizing avoidable morbidity and preserving function. ^[324]^[361]^[363] Minimally invasive, robotic, transanal, anastomotic, fluorescence-guided, organ-preserving, and exenterative strategies should be selected according to anatomy, tumour biology, patient priorities, evidence strength, and demonstrated institutional competence. ^[328]^[360]^[365]^[366]^[368]

Evidence-informed operative options

Strategy	Appropriate interpretation of the cited evidence
Open versus laparoscopic rectal resection	Long-term recurrence and survival were specifically assessed in pooled randomized-trial data for cT1–3 N0–2 M0 disease. ^[324]
Robotic TME	Randomized and meta-analytic studies address TME completeness, CRM, distal margin, and early oncological outcomes; superiority remains uncertain. ^[361]^[363]
Transanal TME	Randomized long-term assessment includes QoL, LARS, and oncological outcomes at ≥12 months. ^[328]
Local excision plus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy	Investigated as an organ-preserving alternative to completion TME for high-risk pT1 and low-risk pT2 cancers. ^[365]
Right-sided CME	Proposed refinement with unresolved benefit-risk and implementation questions. ^[366]

Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy

▸For initially unresectable CRLM, induction therapy should be judged by disease control, conversion to R0–1 resection, OS, PFS and grade ≥3 toxicity; the supplied network meta-analysis abstract does not report regimen rankings. [378]
▸Targeted therapy in CRLM is biomarker- and context-dependent, and HER2 spatial heterogeneity can cause discordant testing and variable treatment response. [381][384]
▸TNT is a reasonable sequencing strategy for LARC, especially where radiotherapy access may delay systemic chemotherapy, but the supplied abstracts do not provide comparative outcome estimates. [387][389]
▸Short-course radiotherapy plus tislelizumab remains investigational pending mature Neo-STAR results. [367]
▸Irinotecan intensification of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy for pT3N0 disease should not be assumed superior without reported comparative results. [379][382]
▸Older adults need structured assessment of performance status, independence, frailty, toxicity risk and nutrition before chemotherapy. [385][386]

! Warning: Do not infer superiority, pCR benefit, OS benefit or toxicity reduction when the supplied reference provides study design but not comparative results. This limitation applies particularly to the cited induction, irinotecan, TNT, tislelizumab, nutritional-supplement and postoperative-radiotherapy studies. [378][379][367][382][386][387]

CP Clinical Pearl: In metastatic disease with a potential conversion-to-resection pathway, multidisciplinary review should integrate response, technical resectability, molecular subtype, treatment toxicity and the possibility of R0–1 surgery rather than relying on response rate alone. [378][381]

Treatment selection and molecular assessment

Systemic and radiation treatment should be selected according to anatomic resectability, treatment intent, tumour location, molecular profile, comorbidity, functional status, nutritional reserve, and patient preference. In initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM), induction therapy is intended not only to control disease but also to increase the possibility of curative-intent conversion surgery; an individual-patient-data network meta-analysis compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), R0–1 resection, and grade ≥3 adverse events, with subgroup analyses by KRAS/BRAF status and primary-tumour sidedness. ^[378] Because the supplied abstract does not report the comparative estimates, regimen ranking or toxicity results, those details should not be inferred from this reference. ^[378]

Targeted therapy has been evaluated in CRLM for OS, PFS, objective response rate, disease-control rate, conversion to resection, and adverse events in a systematic review and meta-analysis incorporating randomized trials and cohort studies. ^[381] The review searched the literature through July 2025, but the supplied abstract does not provide pooled effect estimates or identify a single preferred targeted regimen; targeted treatment therefore remains biomarker- and context-dependent rather than universally interchangeable. ^[381] HER2-directed treatment requires careful biomarker interpretation because HER2 amplification assessed by next-generation sequencing may not fully correspond to immunohistochemistry or fluorescence in-situ hybridization, and spatial intratumoral heterogeneity can contribute to detection discordance and variable treatment response. ^[384]^C

BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic CRC is associated with limited durability of response, although prolonged responses to combined BRAF and MEK inhibition have been reported in individual cases. ^[392] The case report also notes that, despite prior evidence for chemo-free BRAF-inhibitor, anti-EGFR and MEK-inhibitor combinations, MEK inhibitors had not become routine practice and a contemporary phase III first-line strategy did not include a MEK inhibitor. ^[392] These observations support molecularly directed treatment while emphasizing that case reports cannot establish comparative efficacy. ^[392]

Chemotherapy, toxicity prevention, and supportive care

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy remains clinically important in CRC, but oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy can affect up to 80% of treated patients. ^[380] A 12-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated Huangqi Guizhi Wuwu Decoction for prevention of neuropathy in adults receiving XELOX; the study was designed to assess both clinical efficacy and mechanistic neuroprotection. ^[380] The supplied abstract does not report the treatment effect, confidence interval or complete safety results, so the decoction should not be presented as an established standard preventive therapy on the basis of this citation alone. ^[380]

Older adults require individualized dosing and monitoring. In an analysis of three clinical trials and three prospective cohorts including 777 patients aged at least 75 years (median age 80.3 years), grade ≥3 toxicity after three months of chemotherapy and 36-month mortality were modelled using multivariable methods. ^[385] The cohort included patients with impaired functional independence and patients with ECOG performance status above 2, underscoring the relevance of function and frailty when estimating treatment risk. ^[385] Nutritional support may improve treatment tolerance: a randomized-trial secondary analysis evaluated three months of oral nutritional supplements plus dietary advice versus dietary advice alone in postoperative patients receiving chemotherapy, assessing weight, body mass index, skeletal-muscle index and serum markers alongside chemotherapy tolerance and OS. ^[386] The supplied abstract does not provide the magnitude of benefit, and nutritional supplementation should complement rather than replace oncologic treatment. ^[386]

Rectal cancer: total neoadjuvant therapy and chemoradiotherapy

For locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) incorporates systemic chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy before surgery. In a randomized trial of 202 patients, chemotherapy-first TNT followed by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery was compared with conventional neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery; pathological complete response (pCR) was the primary endpoint, with toxicity and OS prespecified as secondary outcomes. ^[387] This sequencing approach may be particularly practical where radiotherapy access is limited because it avoids delaying systemic treatment, although the supplied abstract does not report the comparative pCR, OS or toxicity values. ^[387] Real-world comparative evidence has also assessed TNT against long-course chemoradiotherapy in stage II–III LARC, including tumour response, clearance of MRI-defined high-risk features, surgical outcomes and survival; the cited study was a retrospective single-centre cohort and is therefore vulnerable to selection bias. ^[389]

The phase II randomized Neo-STAR trial evaluated short-course radiotherapy followed by CAPOX plus tislelizumab versus short-course radiotherapy followed by CAPOX alone in patients with cT1–2N+M0 or cT3–4NanyM0 rectal adenocarcinoma. ^[367] The trial was based on the proposed synergy between radiotherapy and immune-checkpoint inhibition and was designed to address the pCR rate, which has remained approximately 30% with short-course-radiotherapy-based TNT. ^[367] Because only early outcomes are identified in the supplied citation, tislelizumab should be regarded as investigational in this setting pending mature efficacy and safety results. ^[367]

The phase III ARISTOTLE trial tested addition of irinotecan to standard fluoropyrimidine-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy in MRI-defined LARC. ^[379] It was a multicentre, open-label, randomized phase III study conducted across 75 UK hospitals, prompted by earlier small studies reporting high pCR rates with acceptable toxicity. ^[379] The supplied abstract does not state the primary endpoint result or toxicity comparison; therefore, irinotecan-containing chemoradiotherapy cannot be recommended as superior solely from the available information. ^[379]

KRAS status may influence response assessment: a meta-analysis examined exon-2 and non-exon-2 KRAS mutations and pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in LARC. ^[331] The supplied abstract does not provide the pooled odds ratios or establish a mutation-specific treatment change, so KRAS subtype should not independently determine chemoradiotherapy selection without broader clinical and molecular context. ^[331]

Radiation in selected circumstances

Postoperative radiotherapy for pT3N0M0 rectal cancer remains controversial. A retrospective analysis compared surgery alone, surgery plus chemotherapy, and surgery plus radiotherapy-based treatment in stage IIA disease treated between 2017 and 2023, seeking recurrence predictors and subgroups most likely to benefit. ^[382] Its observational design cannot establish that radiotherapy improves survival, and the supplied abstract does not report subgroup effect estimates. ^[382]

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has been studied as an adjunct to surgery, particularly using IOERT, KV-IORT and HDR-IORT. A meta-analysis of 25 studies involving 2,664 patients examined postoperative complications, disease-free survival, local control and long-term survival; most evidence concerned IOERT or HDR-IORT, commonly delivered at 15 Gy (range 10–20 Gy), whereas KV-IORT was typically delivered at 12.5 Gy. ^[334] Heterogeneous non-randomized evidence limits routine use, and IORT should be reserved for carefully selected patients in experienced multidisciplinary centres. ^[334]

Immune-checkpoint therapy is biologically complex in liver metastases. A retrospective proof-of-concept study of 472 patients with CRLM or other liver metastases developed and validated macroscopic fractal measures of vascular and metabolic barriers associated with immune exhaustion and primary ICI resistance. ^[390] This remains exploratory and does not establish a clinical test for selecting immunotherapy. ^[390] In dMMR/MSI-H metastatic CRC, immunotherapy is active, but a retrospective series of 166 patients documented both intrinsic progression at first restaging and adaptive progression after an initial response or stable disease, with single-organ and systemic patterns. ^[313] Progression pattern should therefore inform reassessment and subsequent therapy rather than assuming durable benefit in every dMMR/MSI-H patient. ^[313]

Evidence concerning M2-like macrophages, VEGFR2-targeted imaging, cancer-stem-cell resistance, and salvage treatment for anal squamous-cell carcinoma is mechanistic, exploratory, non-CRC-specific or outside standard CRC management and should not be used alone to prescribe systemic or radiation therapy. ^[339]^[391]^C^[383]^[388]^C

Evidence-informed treatment considerations

Clinical situation	Evidence-informed consideration
Initially unresectable CRLM	Compare induction regimens using PFS, OS, R0–1 conversion and grade ≥3 toxicity; interpret by KRAS/BRAF status and sidedness. ^[378]
Biomarker-selected metastatic CRC	Consider targeted therapy according to validated biomarkers; confirm HER2 status carefully because assay discordance and spatial heterogeneity may affect response. ^[381]^[384]^C
LARC	TNT, including chemotherapy-first sequencing, is being evaluated against conventional chemoradiotherapy-first pathways. ^[387]^[389]
LARC with short-course radiotherapy	CAPOX plus tislelizumab is investigational; early-phase evidence is not a mature practice-changing result. ^[367]
Selected high-risk pelvic disease	IORT may be considered in experienced centres; reported doses are commonly 15 Gy for IOERT/HDR-IORT and 12.5 Gy for KV-IORT. ^[334]
Older or nutritionally vulnerable patients	Individualize chemotherapy intensity and provide nutritional assessment/support; outcome benefit from supplements is not quantified in the supplied abstract. ^[385]^[386]

Supportive Care and Complication Management

▸Use multidisciplinary prehabilitation and rehabilitation to address physical function, nutrition, psychological distress, fatigue, and recovery. [326,394,397]
▸Assess fatigue, anxiety, depression, neuropathy, bowel dysfunction, stoma-related concerns, and quality of life longitudinally with validated patient-reported measures. [326,396,398,401,402,403,404]
▸Use CT to confirm diverticulitis, and arrange post-diverticulitis colonoscopy after complicated disease or when alarm symptoms or overdue screening are present. [342]
▸Treat malignant obstruction through multidisciplinary decision-making; the role of stenting as a quasi-bridge to surgery in stage IV disease remains uncertain. [406]
▸Consider specialist palliative care early and individualize follow-up, including patient-led home-based models for selected disease-free survivors. [395,407]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: Computed tomography is essential to confirm diverticulitis, especially at the first presentation or in severe disease. [342]

! Warning: Evidence for traditional Chinese medicine in chemotherapy-related gastrointestinal toxicity and for quasi-bridge-to-surgery stenting in stage IV obstruction is retrospective and insufficient to establish routine practice. [282,406]

HY High Yield: Patient-reported outcomes should be incorporated into routine care because fatigue, neuropathy, bowel dysfunction, body-image concerns, anxiety, depression, and quality-of-life impairment may persist after treatment. [326,396,398,401,402,403,404]

Principles of supportive care

Supportive care should be integrated throughout colorectal cancer treatment and survivorship, with attention to physical function, nutrition, psychological well-being, treatment toxicity, bowel and stoma function, symptoms, and patient-reported quality of life. ^[326]^[394]^[396]^[397]^C^[398]^[401]^[402]^[404]

Prehabilitation, rehabilitation, and fatigue

Multidisciplinary prehabilitation may combine physical activity, nutritional support, psychological counselling, and postoperative rehabilitation within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway. ^[394]^[397]^C In the PHYSSURG-C randomized trial, additional unsupervised moderate physical activity before and after colorectal cancer surgery was evaluated for postoperative fatigue at 4 weeks and 12 months, reflecting the clinically important persistence of fatigue beyond hospital discharge. ^[326] Fatigue may affect up to 90% of patients during chemotherapy and approximately 30% after treatment completion; longitudinal research has examined inflammatory markers and fatigue for up to 3 years after surgery. ^[401]

A virtual, multidisciplinary (pre)rehabilitation model has been developed to standardize preoperative and postoperative support and to address complications, delayed recovery, quality of life, and healthcare utilization after colorectal cancer surgery. ^[394] Preliminary randomized evidence from a small single-center trial suggests that trimodal prehabilitation may improve perioperative anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life when added to standard ERAS care, but the interim sample was only 45 patients and the findings should be considered preliminary. ^[397]^C

Psychological and digital support

Anxiety, depression, and reduced quality of life are clinically important concerns in colorectal cancer. ^[396] A 2026 meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluated digital health interventions for anxiety, depression, and quality of life, supporting digital approaches as complementary—not necessarily replacement—care; the abstract does not establish that one digital modality is superior to another. ^[396] Psychological assessment and referral should therefore be individualized, particularly during surgery, chemotherapy, survivorship, and major body-image or bowel-function changes. ^[397]^C^[398]

Ostomy and bowel dysfunction

Ostomy surgery can substantially affect body image and psychosocial well-being; a systematic review of 10 studies involving 1,454 participants synthesized quantitative evidence using validated body-image measures across cancer-related ostomy populations. ^[398] Ostomy education, appliance support, skin-care guidance, nutritional counselling, and access to specialist stoma nursing should be incorporated into perioperative and survivorship care. ^[398]

Bowel dysfunction should be assessed with patient-reported instruments, including the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score and colorectal-specific quality-of-life questionnaires. ^[328]^[403]^[404] In the randomized Ta-LaTME study, long-term quality of life and bowel function were assessed at ≥12 months after surgery using the EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and LARS score when comparing transanal with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. ^[328] A population-based cohort found that anastomotic leakage was associated with concern for long-term morbidity, although its impact on health-related quality of life at 3 years was specifically evaluated rather than assumed. ^[403] After chemoradiotherapy for non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma, long-term health-related quality of life and functioning should likewise be monitored with EORTC, LARS, and stoma-quality-of-life instruments when applicable. ^[404]

Chemotherapy toxicity

Oxaliplatin-associated treatment-induced peripheral neuropathy can impair walking, interfere with daily activities, reduce quality of life, and compromise treatment delivery. ^[402] In a prospective cohort of 254 colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin, the Treatment-induced Neuropathy Assessment Scale was evaluated against patient-reported walking impairment and CTCAE grades, with proposed cutpoints for numbness, sensory symptoms, and functional interference. ^[402] Neuropathy assessment should be repeated during and after therapy, and clinically significant symptoms should prompt individualized discussion of dose modification, rehabilitation, safety, and symptom management. ^[402]

Chemotherapy-related gastrointestinal adverse events can impair treatment tolerance and quality of life. ^[282] In a propensity score-matched real-world study of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy, a standardized traditional Chinese medicine formula was compared with conventional care; the matched cohorts included 89 patients per group, and outcomes included grade ≥2 gastrointestinal adverse events, weight, albumin, chemotherapy completion, symptom response, and EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life. ^[282] Because this was a single-center retrospective study, the findings should be interpreted as adjunctive comparative evidence rather than definitive evidence for routine use. ^[282]

Diverticulitis and suspected complications

Diverticulitis should be distinguished from recurrent colorectal cancer, treatment-related bowel disease, and other acute abdominal conditions. ^[342] Computed tomography is essential to confirm diverticulitis, particularly at the first presentation and in severe disease. ^[342] The ACG guideline emphasizes discussion of diagnosis, expected clinical course, risk factors, antibiotic use, and prevention in outpatient gastroenterology care. ^[342] After recovery, colonoscopy is recommended after complicated diverticulitis and suggested after uncomplicated disease when alarm symptoms are present or colorectal cancer screening is not up to date, to exclude an underlying malignancy. ^[342]

Obstruction, palliative care, and follow-up

Malignant large-bowel obstruction requires multidisciplinary assessment of resectability, metastatic disease, symptoms, goals of care, and the feasibility of decompression or surgery. ^[406]^C Self-expandable metallic stents are established as a bridge to surgery in non-metastatic obstruction, whereas their role in stage IV disease remains unresolved. ^[406]^C A single-center retrospective study evaluated a “quasi-bridge-to-surgery” strategy in stage IV obstructive colorectal cancer after successful stent placement, but this evidence is insufficient to establish a universal treatment pathway. ^[406]^C

Specialist palliative care should be considered early for patients with advanced disease or high symptom burden. ^[407] A nationwide Finnish register-based study examined whether the timing of first specialist palliative-care contact—categorized according to whether it occurred more than 30 days before death or later—was associated with end-of-life healthcare utilization. ^[407] Patient goals, symptom relief, psychosocial needs, caregiver support, and avoidance of burdensome interventions should guide referral and ongoing review. ^[407]

For disease-free stage I–III survivors, patient-led home-based follow-up has been evaluated after 12 months following surgery. ^[395] In the DISTANCE stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial, 354 survivors from six Dutch hospitals were assigned to patient-led home-based or standard follow-up, with hospital contacts and quality of life among the outcomes. ^[395] Such models may reduce routine hospital burden, but follow-up must retain clear pathways for alarm symptoms, abnormal tests, recurrence concerns, and rapid specialist review. ^[395]

Lifestyle support during surveillance should address diet, physical activity, sedentary behavior, body weight, smoking, alcohol, and counselling. ^[399] A systematic review evaluated multicomponent interventions for behavioral change, colorectal neoplasia outcomes, mortality or survival, and quality of life in people with prior colorectal neoplasia or substantial familial risk. ^[399] Evidence concerning shift work and gastrointestinal disorders derives from nurses rather than colorectal cancer patients and should not be directly extrapolated to CRC supportive-care recommendations. ^[400]

Evidence limitations and related disease contexts

Treatment of anal HSIL is relevant to prevention of anal squamous cell carcinoma, but a systematic review found substantial variation in reported outcomes, definitions, measurement tools, and time points across treatment studies; standardized outcome reporting remains necessary. ^[393] First-line immune checkpoint inhibitor evidence applies specifically to microsatellite instability or mismatch-repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer and concerns comparative systemic treatment efficacy rather than general supportive care. ^[309] Quality-of-life monitoring is also important after curative-intent hepatectomy for high-risk colorectal liver metastases, for which prospective assessment has included EORTC QLQ-C30, liver-metastasis-specific measures, and EQ-5D-5L through 36 months. ^[405]

Priority supportive-care domains

Domain	Practical focus	Evidence
Recovery and fatigue	Pre/postoperative activity, nutrition, psychological support, ERAS integration, and repeated fatigue assessment	^[326]^[394]^[397]^C^[401]
Mental health	Screen for anxiety, depression, distress, and reduced quality of life; consider digital support as an adjunct	^[396]^[397]^C
Bowel and stoma function	Use LARS, EORTC QLQ-C30/CR29, and stoma-quality-of-life measures; provide stoma and body-image support	^[328]^[398]^[403]^[404]
Treatment toxicity	Monitor oxaliplatin neuropathy and chemotherapy-related gastrointestinal adverse events	^[282]^[402]
Acute complications	CT-confirm suspected diverticulitis; assess obstruction and anastomotic complications promptly	^[342]^[403]^[406]^C
Survivorship and advanced disease	Lifestyle intervention, individualized surveillance, and timely specialist palliative care	^[395]^[399]^[407]

Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes

▸Recurrence risk is time-dependent after curative resection, supporting evaluation of surveillance intensity by stage, risk group, and recurrence site rather than relying on a uniform schedule. [408]
▸ctDNA-guided surveillance is being tested prospectively to detect recurrence earlier and increase access to curative-intent treatment; final outcome estimates were not provided in the supplied abstract. [329]
▸Long-term outcomes after rectal cancer surgery include oncological control, bowel dysfunction, fatigue, and health-related quality of life. [324] [326] [328]
▸Potential prognostic biomarkers include KRAS subtype, Siglec-15, tumour-associated macrophages, tertiary lymphoid structures, and transthyretin, but most require further validation before routine use. [331] [332] [339] [340] [410]
▸Evidence for intraoperative radiotherapy and robotic multivisceral surgery remains limited by heterogeneity, retrospective designs, small samples, or single-centre data. [334] [341]

HY High Yield: Prognosis should be communicated as a multidimensional outcome: recurrence and survival remain central, but bowel function, fatigue, psychological health, nutritional status, and health-related quality of life may persist for months or years after treatment. [326] [328] [405]

! Warning: Most biomarker, intraoperative-radiotherapy, and specialized-surgical evidence cited here is observational, exploratory, preclinical, or internally validated; these findings should not replace stage-based risk assessment or established surveillance pathways. [332] [334] [340] [341] [383]

Overall determinants of prognosis

Long-term prognosis in colorectal cancer is influenced by pathological stage, recurrence biology, treatment response, molecular characteristics, nutritional and inflammatory status, and the quality of postoperative surveillance. The evidence supplied includes randomized trials, prospective studies, pooled analyses, systematic reviews, and retrospective cohorts; their findings should therefore be interpreted according to study design and endpoint maturity.

Recurrence after curative resection

In an integrated analysis of four Japanese phase III trials including 3,655 patients with curatively resected pathological stage II or III colorectal cancer, recurrence hazards were modelled over time and according to stage, risk group, and recurrence site. The analysis was specifically designed to identify the timing of peak recurrence hazards during the first 5 years after surgery and to inform time-adapted surveillance rather than a uniform follow-up schedule. ^[408]

A two-centre retrospective cohort of 2,208 patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer evaluated whether preoperative endoscopic obstruction predicted site-specific recurrence after radical resection. End points included liver-, lung-, and peritoneal-metastasis-free survival and local-recurrence-free survival, with analyses stratified by primary tumour site and adjusted using multivariable Cox regression. These data support consideration of obstruction as a potential recurrence-risk marker, although the observational design limits causal inference. ^[409]

Postoperative surveillance may increasingly incorporate circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). The prospective randomized phase III FIND trial enrolled patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer after curative resection and compared methylation-based ctDNA-guided surveillance with standard CT-based monitoring. In the ctDNA-guided strategy, a positive result triggered immediate CT imaging; negative results were followed with bimonthly CT and quarterly ctDNA testing, with imaging returning to standard frequency after two consecutive negative ctDNA results. The prespecified clinical objective was to increase curative-intent treatment for recurrence, but the supplied evidence does not provide the final efficacy estimates. ^[329]

Surgical approach and oncological outcome

A prospective individual-patient-data meta-analysis combined the ALaCaRT and ACOSOG Z6051 randomized trials in patients with cT1–3 N0–2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma. Both parent trials had failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of laparoscopic compared with open proctectomy for a composite pathological measure of successful resection, defined using total mesorectal excision completeness and margin status. The meta-analysis was undertaken because neither trial alone was powered to detect differences in long-term recurrence or survival; its purpose was to compare long-term oncological outcomes while using patient-level data. ^[324]

The randomized Ta-LaTME study compared transanal and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for resectable mid- and low-rectal adenocarcinoma. It assessed long-term health-related quality of life using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires and bowel dysfunction using the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score at baseline and at follow-up of at least 12 months, alongside long-term oncological outcomes. Thus, prognosis after rectal cancer surgery should be considered together with persistent bowel dysfunction and patient-reported quality of life, not survival alone. ^[328]

For selected cT4 rectal cancers requiring multivisceral resection, a single-centre retrospective study evaluated robot-assisted surgery in 45 consecutive patients. Outcomes included recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and local recurrence, but the small sample, single-centre setting, and retrospective design restrict generalizability. ^[341]^C In patients with cirrhosis, a retrospective comparative study of 2,523 laparoscopic colorectal resections—including 55 patients with liver cirrhosis—examined conversion to open surgery as well as short- and long-term outcomes; the cirrhosis group had a significantly higher conversion rate, indicating that comorbidity may affect operative feasibility and subsequent recovery. ^[411]^C

Metastatic disease and quality of life

After curative-intent hepatectomy for high-risk colorectal liver metastases, a prospective longitudinal study followed health-related quality of life using EORTC QLQ-C30, LMC21, and EQ-5D-5L assessments from before surgery through 36 months. Of 297 consenting patients, 146 were evaluable; 70% had synchronous liver metastases and all had a clinical risk score of at least 3. The study emphasizes that long-term benefit after metastasectomy should be assessed through both disease status and sustained quality of life. ^[405]

Molecular, immune, and host-related prognostic markers

A meta-analysis examined KRAS mutation subtypes and pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, comparing mutations within and outside exon 2. Its endpoint was response prediction rather than definitive survival, so any prognostic interpretation should remain linked to treatment response. ^[331]

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated tumoral Siglec-15 expression and survival across solid tumours, including colorectal cancer where eligible evidence existed. Because the analysis combined heterogeneous tumour types and observational studies, Siglec-15 remains a candidate prognostic or therapeutic biomarker rather than an established clinical decision tool. ^[332] Similarly, a retrospective study of 44 metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab examined CD68+CD163+ M2-like macrophages, their spatial distribution, PD-L1 expression, treatment resistance, and survival. Its small sample limits confidence in using macrophage markers for individual prognostication. ^[339]

In stage II–III colorectal cancer, a machine-learning study developed and internally validated a recurrence model incorporating location-specific tertiary lymphoid structures in 224 patients after curative resection, divided into training (156) and validation (68) cohorts. The model considered intratumoral, invasive-front, and peritumoral TLS features, but external validation is required before clinical adoption. ^[340] A single-institution cohort of 536 stage I–III patients evaluated preoperative transthyretin using sex-specific cutoffs of 20.9 mg/dL for men and 16.95 mg/dL for women, reflecting the potential prognostic importance of nutritional and inflammatory status while requiring independent validation. ^[410]

Survivorship and treatment-related outcomes

Fatigue remains a relevant long-term survivorship outcome after colorectal cancer surgery. The randomized PHYSSURG-C trial examined additional moderate physical activity before and after surgery versus standard care, with fatigue assessed at 4 weeks and 12 months; the reported analysis was post hoc and exploratory. ^[326] A separate pilot randomized trial assigned 50 post-treatment patients to a 6-week psycho-behavioural intervention or usual care and assessed cancer-related fatigue, physical activity, diet, sleep, anxiety, and depressive symptoms; feasibility and preliminary effects were the principal objectives, not definitive survival improvement. ^[327]^C

Intraoperative radiotherapy has also been evaluated for long-term prognosis. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 studies involving 2,664 patients examined disease-free survival, local control, long-term survival, and complications for non-implantable techniques including IOERT, KV-IORT, and HDR-IORT. Most evidence concerned IOERT or HDR-IORT, commonly at 15 Gy (range 10–20 Gy), while KV-IORT was typically delivered at 12.5 Gy; heterogeneity and predominantly non-randomized evidence limit firm conclusions. ^[334]

Finally, preclinical evidence indicates that colorectal cancer stem cells may contribute to treatment resistance, recurrence, and progression through multiple molecular pathways. This systematic review is mechanistic rather than a validated clinical prognostic analysis and should not be used alone to estimate an individual patient’s survival. ^[383]

Evidence relevant to prognosis and survivorship

Domain	Evidence and implications
Recurrence timing	Pooled stage II/III trial data modelled recurrence hazards during the first 5 years. ^[408]
Molecular surveillance	FIND tested ctDNA-guided CT escalation, with bimonthly CT and quarterly ctDNA after a positive/negative surveillance framework. ^[329]
Rectal surgery	Randomized analyses assessed long-term oncological outcomes, quality of life, and bowel dysfunction after laparoscopic, open, transanal, or robotic approaches. ^[324] ^[328] ^[341]^C
Metastatic surgery	Prospective follow-up after hepatectomy assessed HR-QoL through 36 months in high-risk CRLM. ^[405]
Host factors	Transthyretin was studied using cutoffs of 20.9 mg/dL in men and 16.95 mg/dL in women. ^[410]
Supportive care	Exercise and psycho-behavioural interventions targeted fatigue and broader survivorship outcomes. ^[326] ^[327]^C

Landmark Trials and Key Evidence

▸Updated evidence spans screening, endoscopic resection, rectal-cancer neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, metastatic disease, obstruction, HIPEC, survivorship, and supportive care. [324][413][414][361][415][416][113][98][176][222][417][418][305][419][420][421][422][423][424][425]
▸CADe has been tested in 48 randomized trials involving 38,986 patients, with several systems improving adenoma detection. [113]
▸Neoadjuvant immunotherapy evidence is concentrated in pMMR rectal cancer, with comparisons involving PD-1 inhibitors and SCRT- or LCRT-based platforms. [176][417]
▸Long-term patient-level evidence now informs laparoscopic versus open proctectomy, while randomized evidence separately evaluates robotic versus laparoscopic TME for tumours ≤10 cm from the anal verge. [324][361]
▸In dMMR/MSI-high metastatic colorectal cancer, current evidence compares immunotherapy strategies and evaluates combinations with chemotherapy and bevacizumab, while endocrine and thyroid toxicity require monitoring. [305][413][423]
▸Detailed tumour location may refine anti-EGFR treatment selection beyond a simple right-versus-left classification in RAS-wild-type metastatic disease. [419]
▸Survivorship, exercise, and psychosocial interventions have randomized-trial evidence addressing quality of life, treatment-related symptoms, and cancer-related fatigue. [98][222][415]

HY High Yield: Interpret treatment effects in the context of molecular subtype: dMMR/MSI-high status guides immunotherapy evidence, whereas RAS status and detailed anatomical location may refine anti-EGFR selection. [305][413][419][423]

CP Clinical Pearl: Rectal-cancer trial interpretation depends on both treatment platform and staging quality; MRI variables such as mrT stage, extramural venous invasion, and tumour deposits remain incompletely and inconsistently reported across neoadjuvant trials. [417][422]

! Warning: The supplied evidence does not establish that prophylactic HIPEC, routine clipping after colorectal ESD, or any single CADe platform should be universally used; these interventions remain dependent on patient, lesion, procedural, and system-level factors. [418][424][425]

Scope of the updated evidence

The current evidence base includes individual-patient-data meta-analysis, randomized-trial systematic reviews and network meta-analyses, pooled analyses of randomized trials, and prospective phase III evidence across screening, endoscopic treatment, rectal-cancer neoadjuvant therapy, surgery, metastatic disease, survivorship, and supportive care. Most cited studies were rated evidence level 1a; the COMMIT trial and the anatomical anti-EGFR analysis were rated 1b in the supplied evidence set. ^[324]^[413]^[414]^[361]^[415]^[416]^[113]^[98]^[176]^[222]^[417]^[418]^[305]^[419]^[420]^[421]^[422]^[423]^[424]^[425]

Screening and endoscopic detection

Colonoscopy remains the reference screening test, but adenoma and sessile-serrated-lesion miss rates are important limitations. Randomized-trial meta-analyses consistently evaluate computer-aided detection (CADe) as a strategy to improve adenoma detection rate (ADR), adenomas per colonoscopy, sessile serrated lesion detection, and miss rates. ^[416]^[113]^[424] The largest cited network meta-analysis included 48 randomized trials and 38,986 patients and compared multiple CADe systems with standard colonoscopy; several systems improved ADR, although comparative performance varied between platforms. ^[113] A separate extended network meta-analysis evaluated EndoAngel, EndoAID, CAD-EYE, GI Genius, and EndoScreener using ADR and adenomas per colonoscopy as primary outcomes, with withdrawal time and additional detection outcomes as secondary measures. ^[424] These findings support CADe as an adjunct to colonoscopy, while emphasizing that system-specific performance and implementation remain relevant. ^[113]^[416]^[424]

For large superficial colorectal lesions, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) provides en-bloc, organ-sparing treatment but is technically demanding and may be time intensive. An updated meta-analysis of randomized trials compared traction-assisted ESD with conventional ESD, specifically examining procedural efficiency, technical and clinical effectiveness, safety, and the influence of endoscopist experience. ^[414] Prophylactic clipping after colorectal ESD was assessed in another randomized-trial meta-analysis, focusing on clinically significant delayed bleeding, postprocedural perforation, and postelectrocoagulation syndrome. ^[418] The evidence addresses whether routine defect closure reduces adverse events, but the supplied abstract does not establish a universal clipping recommendation. ^[418]

Rectal-cancer neoadjuvant therapy and surgery

In locally advanced, proficient-mismatch-repair (pMMR) rectal cancer, randomized evidence has been synthesized for adding PD-1 inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). The relevant trials compare nCRT plus a PD-1 inhibitor with nCRT alone in untreated, non-metastatic pMMR disease, where conventional nCRT has relatively low pathological and clinical complete-response rates. ^[176] A broader network meta-analysis compared short-course radiotherapy (SCRT)-based and long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT)-based neoadjuvant platforms, each with or without immune checkpoint inhibitors, because direct comparisons between platforms remain limited. ^[417] MRI reporting is also central to interpretation: a systematic review of neoadjuvant randomized trials examined reporting of pretreatment mrT stage, extramural venous invasion, and tumour deposits, identifying gaps in consistency and integration of these prognostic variables. ^[422]

Long-term surgical evidence has materially strengthened the comparison of laparoscopic and open proctectomy. The prospective individual-patient-data meta-analysis combined the ALaCaRT and ACOSOG Z6051 randomized trials in patients with cT1–3 N0–2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma. ^[324] Although the original trials could not demonstrate non-inferiority of laparoscopy for a composite pathology measure of successful resection, neither was individually powered for long-term recurrence or survival; the planned meta-analysis therefore evaluated oncological outcomes using pooled patient-level data. ^[324] Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) has likewise been examined exclusively through randomized trials in mid- and low-rectal adenocarcinoma, defined as tumours ≤10 cm from the anal verge, with circumferential-resection-margin positivity, resection quality, and early oncological outcomes as key endpoints. ^[361]

Metastatic colorectal cancer and systemic therapy

For first-line dMMR/MSI-high metastatic colorectal cancer, the phase III NRG-GI004/SWOG-S1610 COMMIT trial randomly assigned patients to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab plus atezolizumab, atezolizumab monotherapy, or a chemotherapy–bevacizumab control strategy. ^[305] The trial addresses whether chemotherapy and vascular endothelial growth-factor inhibition enhance PD-L1 blockade, given that a substantial proportion of patients receiving single-agent PD-1-directed therapy progress within 12 months. ^[305]

A randomized-trial meta-analysis compared immune-checkpoint-inhibitor monotherapy with dual immunotherapy in dMMR/MSI-high metastatic disease, evaluating objective response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, and treatment-related risks. ^[423] Endocrine toxicity has been separately quantified in a network meta-analysis of six randomized trials: ICI-based regimens increased thyroid-related toxicity versus conventional therapy, with pembrolizumab and ICI plus tyrosine-kinase inhibitor regimens increasing hypothyroidism risk, and ICI–TKI and ICI plus chemotherapy plus an anti-angiogenic antibody increasing hyperthyroidism risk. ^[413]

Treatment selection beyond simple right-versus-left classification is supported by an individual-patient pooled analysis of 12 randomized trials in the ARCAD database. In RAS-wild-type metastatic disease, first-line doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR therapy was compared with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab across detailed anatomical tumour segments, using overall survival as the primary endpoint and progression-free survival and response rate as secondary endpoints. ^[419]

For patients at high risk of peritoneal recurrence or with abdominal metastatic involvement, prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been evaluated against surgery alone in a systematic review and meta-analysis incorporating randomized trials and cohort studies. ^[425] The analysis pooled hazard ratios for recurrence and survival-related outcomes, reflecting continued uncertainty about routine prophylactic HIPEC. ^[425] Initial management of potentially curable left-sided malignant colonic obstruction has similarly been compared using immediate surgery, self-expandable metallic stents, decompression stomas, and transanal tubes in a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized and propensity-score comparative studies. ^[421]

Survivorship and supportive care

Survivorship programmes have been evaluated in 22 randomized trials involving 2,949 colorectal-cancer survivors, with health-related quality of life as the principal outcome and methodological quality assessed using RoB 2 and GRADE. ^[415] Exercise interventions during adjuvant chemotherapy have been studied across randomized and non-randomized designs for exercise capacity, muscle strength, fatigue, pain, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, psychological symptoms, and quality of life. ^[98] Psychosocial interventions have been synthesized in randomized trials using short-term, medium-term, and long-term follow-up categories for cancer-related fatigue, with certainty assessed using GRADE. ^[222]

Methodological implication

Covariate-adjusted log-rank testing can increase statistical power and precision in oncology trials with time-to-event endpoints by accounting for prognostic baseline variables, while requiring prespecified adjustment strategies and preservation of type I error control. ^[420]

Selected evidence domains

Domain	Updated evidence	Principal outcomes
Colonoscopy	CADe randomized-trial meta-analyses and network meta-analyses	ADR, adenomas per colonoscopy, serrated-lesion detection, miss rates ^[113]^[416]^[424]
Endoscopic treatment	Traction-assisted versus conventional ESD; prophylactic clipping after ESD	Efficiency, resection outcomes, bleeding, perforation, and postelectrocoagulation syndrome ^[414]^[418]
Rectal cancer	PD-1 inhibitor-containing nCRT; SCRT versus LCRT platforms; laparoscopic/open and robotic/laparoscopic TME	Complete response, safety, resection quality, CRM, recurrence, and survival ^[176]^[324]^[361]^[417]
Metastatic CRC	COMMIT, immunotherapy comparisons, anti-EGFR anatomical analysis	Survival, progression, response, duration of response, and toxicity ^[305]^[419]^[423]
Survivorship	Survivorship programmes, exercise, and psychosocial interventions	HRQoL, fatigue, function, neuropathy, pain, anxiety, and depression ^[98]^[222]^[415]

Prevention and Screening

▸Individualize screening cessation in older adults by considering comorbidity, life expectancy, time to benefit, procedural burden, and patient preferences. [266]
▸A positive FIT requires timely follow-up colonoscopy; navigation, digital tracking, open-access pathways, and coordinated health-system interventions can address noncompletion. [267]
▸Organized FIT programs, including programs targeting adults aged 50–69 years, are associated with improved CRC-specific outcomes in population-based evidence. [338]
▸Screening access requires targeted implementation for rural, Medicaid-enrolled, HIV-positive, and otherwise underserved populations. [280][330][335][429]
▸Colonoscopy remains central because it allows biopsy and polyp removal; capsule endoscopy and plasma cfDNA methylation assays are being evaluated as less invasive alternatives or adjuncts. [325][430]
▸Lynch syndrome warrants enhanced colonoscopic surveillance, whereas metabolic and lipid risk models should be considered risk-stratification tools rather than replacements for screening. [274][271][281][337]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: A positive FIT is an abnormal screening result, not a completed screening episode: timely colonoscopy is required for diagnostic evaluation and possible lesion removal. [267]

CP Clinical Pearl: For older adults, the key question is not age alone but whether the expected time to benefit from preventing CRC exceeds the patient’s competing health risks and procedural burden. [266][432]

! Warning: Predictive models, observational associations, and emerging blood- or capsule-based tests should not be used to replace guideline-directed colonoscopy when diagnostic evaluation or polyp removal is required. [271][281][325][330][337][430]

Screening eligibility and individualized decisions

Screening aims to detect colorectal cancer (CRC) or premalignant lesions before symptoms develop. Evidence in the supplied literature addresses average-risk adults, older adults, rural and underserved populations, people living with HIV, individuals with metabolic liver disease, and hereditary-risk groups. ^[426]^[429]^[271]^[274] Screening decisions should incorporate age, comorbidity, life expectancy, prior findings, procedural risk, and patient preferences rather than relying on age alone. ^[266]

For older adults, the anticipated benefit of removing preneoplastic lesions must be balanced against limited time to benefit and increasing risks or burdens of colonoscopy. The AGA expert review specifically emphasizes discussing cessation of CRC screening when age or comorbidities make eradication of preneoplastic lesions unlikely to provide meaningful benefit. ^[266] A nationwide Korean cohort of adults aged 75–85 years found that colonoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of CRC than no colonoscopy after propensity matching, although the study was observational and does not establish that every person in this age range benefits from screening. ^[432]^C

Screening tests and diagnostic pathways

Fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and colonoscopy are major screening strategies for asymptomatic average-risk adults; a 2026 systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to estimate their sensitivity and specificity. ^[426] Organized FIT-based screening programs are associated with improved CRC outcomes: a population-based cohort from the Basque Country evaluated a program targeting adults aged 50–69 years and assessed CRC-specific mortality after implementation. ^[338] FIT is not a complete diagnostic evaluation when positive. Patients with a positive stool test have increased CRC risk and should receive timely follow-up colonoscopy; persistent delays represent a major break in the screening pathway. ^[267]

Interventions to improve completion after abnormal stool testing include coordinated patient navigation, digital tools, open-access colonoscopy, and health-system tracking. ^[267] In rural Medicaid populations, mailed FIT combined with navigation was implemented through partnerships between clinics and Medicaid health plans, while practice facilitation was used to address implementation barriers. ^[335] A rural screening trial used remotely delivered navigation to increase colonoscopy completion and reported recruitment approaches designed to include rural and underserved residents in research. ^[330] Awareness and participation remain important challenges in rural populations; a cross-sectional study in rural northern China evaluated factors associated with CRC screening awareness. ^[280]

Colonoscopy permits direct examination, biopsy, and polyp removal, but may be unpleasant and can be limited by waiting times. ^[325] Colon capsule endoscopy using PillCam COLON 2 has therefore been evaluated as a potential alternative for direct colonic visualization and detection of polyps or CRC; its clinical effectiveness, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness were examined in a systematic review and economic evaluation. ^[325] During colonoscopy, techniques that improve mucosal visualization may increase preventive yield. In a propensity-score-matched real-world study, water-exchange colonoscopy was compared with conventional air insufflation for adenoma detection, bowel-preparation quality, and procedure efficiency. ^[431]

Novel blood-based approaches remain investigational. A prospective study evaluated a six-biomarker plasma cell-free DNA methylation panel—Septin9 region 1, BCAT1, IKZF1, BCAN, VAV3, and Septin9 region 2—in 570 high-risk participants with successful colonoscopy as the comparator. ^[430] These data support evaluation of molecular assays as risk-stratification or screening tools but do not replace colonoscopy for diagnosis or removal of detected lesions. ^[430]

Risk-based prevention and high-risk groups

Risk assessment can identify people who may require intensified prevention or surveillance. A meta-analysis-derived model was developed to predict colorectal polyps in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), a population reported to have a higher polyp incidence than individuals without NAFLD. ^[271] In patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), a retrospective cohort examined whether longitudinal improvement in cardiometabolic risk factors was associated with reduced metachronous advanced colorectal neoplasia after an initial and surveillance colonoscopy. ^[281] These observational findings support attention to metabolic health but do not establish lifestyle or metabolic optimization as a substitute for recommended endoscopic surveillance. ^[271]^[281]

A single-center colonoscopy cohort of adults aged 18–44 years found that polyp, adenoma, and serrated-lesion detection increased with age, with the highest rates in the 40–44-year group; metabolic risk factors were assessed specifically in this age stratum. ^[273] These findings are relevant to the rising concern about early-onset CRC but do not, by themselves, define a population-wide screening interval for adults younger than standard guideline age. ^[273]

People living with HIV have an increasing absolute CRC burden as the population ages. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated routine screening uptake and pathology-confirmed lesions detected by lower endoscopy in adults with HIV, including comparisons with HIV-negative controls. ^[429] Screening programs should therefore address access and follow-up in this population while accounting for individual age, health status, and preventive-care engagement. ^[429]

Patients with Lynch syndrome require enhanced colonoscopic surveillance because pathogenic germline mismatch-repair variants confer increased CRC risk. ^[274] An English national observational cohort of 4,732 mismatch-repair carriers assessed adherence to surveillance guidance and the relationship between surveillance and CRC incidence and mortality. ^[274]

Shared decision-making and quality improvement

Personalized risk communication can support informed screening choices. In a randomized trial of 1,084 average-risk adults aged 50–75 years who were due for screening, a decision aid with personalized risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia was compared with a decision aid without that information; outcomes included informed concordance, screening intent, and decision-making. ^[428] Navigation can also improve patient support, although a randomized trial of nurse navigation from diagnosis through treatment primarily evaluated self-efficacy during cancer care rather than initial screening. ^[427]

Risk-reduction research also includes modifiable metabolic and lipid factors. A retrospective case-control study of 411 colonoscopy patients evaluated interactions between total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol in relation to colorectal polyps and developed an internally assessed predictive nomogram. ^[337] Because these data are predictive and observational, they should not be interpreted as proof that lipid modification prevents CRC. ^[337]

When an obstructing left-sided CRC prevents complete preoperative colonoscopic assessment, synchronous proximal lesions may remain undetected. A retrospective study evaluated preoperative FDG-PET/CT as a triage tool, using postoperative clearing colonoscopy within 6 months as the reference standard. ^[433]^C This scenario concerns diagnostic completion after cancer detection rather than population screening, but it underscores the importance of evaluating the entire colon when the initial examination is incomplete. ^[433]^C

Evidence-informed screening and follow-up considerations

Situation	Evidence-informed approach
Older adult with substantial comorbidity or limited life expectancy	Discuss whether screening has sufficient time to benefit and whether cessation is appropriate. ^[266]
Positive stool test	Arrange timely colonoscopy; use navigation, digital tools, open-access scheduling, and tracking to reduce noncompletion. ^[267]
Rural or underserved population	Consider mailed FIT, patient navigation, clinic–health-plan partnerships, and practice facilitation. ^[330]^[335]
Lynch syndrome	Maintain enhanced colonoscopic surveillance and monitor adherence. ^[274]
Incomplete colon evaluation because of obstruction	Complete evaluation of the remaining colon when clinically feasible; postoperative clearing colonoscopy was assessed within 6 months in the supplied evidence. ^[433]^C
Considering noninvasive tests	Capsule endoscopy and plasma cfDNA methylation assays remain evaluated alternatives or adjuncts, not established replacements for therapeutic colonoscopy. ^[325]^[430]

Guidelines and Resources

▸Average-risk CRC screening begins at **45 years** under the ACS recommendation, with newer stool RNA, stool DNA, and blood-based cell-free DNA tests evaluated in the 2026 update. [434]
▸A positive stool test requires timely follow-up colonoscopy; navigation, digital tools, coordinated outreach, and open-access pathways can improve completion. [267]
▸Older-adult surveillance should account for life expectancy, comorbidity, procedural risk, and time to benefit; cessation may be appropriate when benefit is unlikely. [266]
▸Hereditary CRC evaluation is important because approximately **5%** of CRCs have a strong genetic component and require syndrome-specific surveillance. [254]
▸MSI testing supports assessment of mismatch-repair deficiency, Lynch syndrome, chemotherapy resistance, and immunotherapy responsiveness. [260]
▸Rectal cancer staging commonly requires high-resolution pelvic imaging plus assessment of distant disease, while IMRT and IGRT have dedicated ESTRO technical guidance. [255] [251]

Dx Diagnostic Essentials: A positive stool-based CRC screening result is not a completed screening episode: timely follow-up colonoscopy is required. [267]

CP Clinical Pearl: After diverticulitis, colonoscopy is recommended for complicated disease and is suggested for uncomplicated disease with alarm symptoms or overdue CRC screening. [342]

! Warning: Do not extrapolate sporadic-CRC surveillance to hereditary CRC, appendiceal tumors with peritoneal involvement, rNETs, or anal cancer; each has dedicated guidance and distinct diagnostic or treatment considerations. [252] [254] [258] [264]

Screening and surveillance

The American Cancer Society (ACS) 2026 update addresses colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk adults in the context of increasing CRC incidence among people younger than 65 years. The ACS previously lowered the recommended screening-initiation age to 45 years in 2018 and reassessed newer molecular-based tests, including a multitarget stool RNA test, a next-generation multitarget stool DNA test, and a blood-based circulating cell-free DNA assay, using targeted systematic evidence review and modeling of potential effects on CRC incidence and mortality. ^[434] The update reaffirms the ACS screening recommendation and should be used alongside local regulatory approvals, test-specific performance data, and shared decision-making. ^[434]

Stool-based screening is effective only when abnormal results receive timely diagnostic evaluation. Patients with a positive stool test have increased CRC risk and should undergo follow-up colonoscopy; however, completion rates remain suboptimal. Evidence-informed system responses include patient navigation, digital tools, coordinated outreach, and open-access colonoscopy pathways for patients and referring clinicians. ^[267]

Surveillance decisions in older adults should incorporate age, comorbidity, life expectancy, procedural risk, and time to benefit rather than relying on age alone. The AGA expert review highlights the projected growth of the US population aged ≥65 years to 82 million, or approximately 23% of the population, by 2050, and emphasizes that cessation of screening or surveillance may be appropriate when limited life expectancy or competing illness makes eradication of premalignant lesions unlikely to provide meaningful benefit. ^[266] The review notes strong population-level evidence that colonoscopy reduces CRC mortality, while also emphasizing the need for individualized assessment of the expected yield and burden of endoscopic surveillance. ^[266]

After recovery from diverticulitis, colonoscopy is recommended for complicated disease and is suggested after uncomplicated disease when alarm symptoms are present or CRC screening is not up to date, to exclude an underlying malignancy. Computed tomography is essential for confirming diverticulitis, particularly at first presentation and in severe disease. ^[342]

Hereditary disease, biomarkers, and neuroendocrine tumors

Approximately 5% of CRCs have a strong genetic component and are classified as hereditary CRC. The JSCCR 2024 hereditary CRC guideline emphasizes that early onset, synchronous or metachronous cancers, and extracolonic malignancies require management distinct from sporadic CRC, including accurate genetic diagnosis, targeted surveillance, and risk-reduction strategies. ^[254]

Microsatellite instability (MSI) testing is increasingly important because mismatch-repair deficiency is associated with Lynch syndrome, chemotherapy resistance, and response to immune-checkpoint blockade. The EMQN best-practice guideline provides 15 recommendations for MSI analysis, including contemporary approaches to testing and reporting. ^[260]

The 2026 NANETS guideline addresses stage I–III well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs), which account for approximately 12%–27% of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors in North America. It uses GRADE and Delphi consensus methods and incorporates advances such as 68Ga- or 64Cu-DOTATATE somatostatin-receptor PET/CT, pelvic MRI, and modified endoscopic mucosal management. ^[252]

Imaging, radiotherapy, and treatment guidance

For colon cancer, the ACR recommends that imaging for initial staging and postoperative restaging or surveillance primarily focus on detecting distant metastases in the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, regardless of the primary tumor’s T or N stage. Appendiceal cancers are considered separately because their management differs, although imaging likewise focuses mainly on distant disease, particularly in the abdomen and pelvis. ^[256]

Rectal cancer requires high-resolution pelvic assessment for local tumor extension and separate evaluation of distant metastatic disease, often necessitating combined imaging modalities. The ACR criteria address staging, restaging, and disease monitoring, while the 2026 ESTRO technical guideline provides implementation guidance for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), which are integral components of contemporary rectal cancer care. ^[255] ^[251]

The JSCCR 2024 treatment guideline revises recommendations across colorectal cancer management to reflect newer evidence, reduce institutional variation, avoid insufficient or unnecessary treatment, and improve communication among clinicians and patients. ^[257] Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology guidance focuses specifically on lymphadenectomy and summarizes evidence-based recommendations for surgical practice. ^[265]

For locally advanced rectal cancer, systematic reviews and network meta-analysis have compared neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy strategies in T3–4 or node-positive, nonmetastatic disease and evaluated outcomes including pathologic complete response and survival. ^[439] A separate meta-analysis assessed neoadjuvant treatment combined with immunotherapy in mismatch-repair-proficient or microsatellite-stable nonmetastatic rectal cancer, examining pathologic and clinical complete response, R0 resection, anal preservation, and adverse events. ^[438] Updated multidisciplinary guidance supports selective use of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) after systematic review and GRADE assessment of randomized and matched nonrandomized comparisons with laparoscopic or robotic TME. ^[253]

Appendiceal, anal, and metastatic disease resources

Consensus guidance for appendiceal tumors with peritoneal involvement was updated using a modified Delphi process because these rare and heterogeneous tumors lack high-quality disease-specific evidence and are often managed using extrapolation from CRC or pooled studies. ^[435] ^[264]

The ACR anal cancer criteria recommend pelvic MRI and FDG-PET/CT as usually appropriate complements to clinical and digital rectal examination for locoregional staging; CT and FDG-PET/CT are usually appropriate for assessing distant disease and recurrence. ^[436] Australian guidance for people living with HIV recommends primary high-risk HPV testing with cytology triage for high-resolution anoscopy, with screening beginning at 35 years for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men and transgender women living with HIV. ^[258]

In chemorefractory metastatic CRC, anti-EGFR rechallenge for patients whose circulating tumor DNA remains RAS/BRAF wild type is an emerging strategy evaluated against standard care in randomized-trial systematic review and meta-analysis; reported outcomes include disease-control rate, objective response rate, and survival. ^[437]

Selected guideline and resource domains

Domain	Principal guidance or resource	Key scope
Screening	ACS 2026 update	Average-risk screening from 45 years and evaluation of newer molecular tests. ^[434]
Positive stool tests	GI endoscopy practice update	Timely colonoscopy, navigation, digital tools, and open-access pathways. ^[267]
Older adults	AGA expert review	Individualized continuation or cessation of CRC surveillance. ^[266]
Hereditary CRC	JSCCR 2024	Genetic diagnosis, risk reduction, and targeted surveillance. ^[254]
Rectal cancer imaging	ACR	Pelvic local staging and chest/abdomen/pelvis assessment for distant disease. ^[255]
Rectal radiotherapy	ESTRO	Technical implementation of IMRT and IGRT. ^[251]
Anal cancer in HIV	Australian guideline	High-risk HPV testing with cytology triage and high-resolution anoscopy. ^[258]

References

[1]
Xu YB, Huang YS, Huang XX et al.. “Prognostic value of the prognostic nutritional index in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” BMC gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41731387 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[2]
Wang P, Jiang H. “Prognostic value of systemic immune-inflammation index for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41727644 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[3]
Wang Z, Zou J, Li Y et al.. “Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of heat shock proteins in colorectal cancer patients: a meta-analysis.” World journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41792786 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[4]
Manz NB, Reed J, Kanner CD et al.. “Temporal change in skeletal muscle index as a predictor of recurrence for patients with locally advanced colorectal malignancy: a retrospective cohort study.” Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society (2026). PMID: 41947259 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[5]
Daca-Alvarez M, Manzotti C, Zaffalon D et al.. “Accuracy and variability of locoregional staging in T1 rectal cancer: nationwide multicentre cohort study.” BJS open (2025). PMID: 41914767 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification, Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes, Prevention and Screening
[6]
Tsokkou S, Konstantinidis I, Chatzikomnitsa P et al.. “The Molecular Signature of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Distinct Biology and Clinical Challenges.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41977468 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[7]
Nemoto D, Togashi K, Zhu X et al.. “Artificial Intelligence-Based Prediction of Invasion Depth in Colorectal Cancer via Endoscopic Imaging (With Video): A Narrative Review.” Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (2026). PMID: 41859770 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[8]
Cabitza VS, Capponi PC, Brusa I et al.. “Colorectal Cancer: A Landscape of New Potential Radiopharmaceuticals.” Molecular diagnosis & therapy (2026). PMID: 41807884 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[9]
Xie H, Xu N, Wei L et al.. “The prognostic value of the albumin/neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in colorectal cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41971429 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[10]
Shi X, Tian G, Zhou C et al.. “Albumin and neutrophil combined prognostic grade for predicting overall survival in colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41907620 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[11]
Liu B, He H, Guan X et al.. “Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma originating from the left colon, right colon, or rectum: a nationwide retrospective study in China.” Journal of gastrointestinal oncology (2026). PMID: 41816592 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[12]
Rosenbaum W, Rubio Garcia M, Löfgren-Burström A et al.. “Full-length 16S rRNA nanopore sequencing enables species resolution of Fusobacterium associated with colorectal cancer.” Gut microbes (2026). PMID: 41963777 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[13]
Pan AY, Kakavand H, Sioson L et al.. “A Critical Examination of the Changes Proposed by the AJCCCCEP for the AJCC 9th Edition Colorectal Cancer Staging System.” The American journal of surgical pathology (2026). PMID: 41957954 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[14]
Yin Y, Sun Z, Deng X et al.. “Integration of deep learning and radiomic features from multiplex immunohistochemistry images for reproducible Multi-Outcome prediction in a Multi-Center study of colorectal cancer.” International journal of medical informatics (2026). PMID: 41955913 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[15]
Fournier E, Schaffar R, Staehelin K et al.. “Rising early-onset colorectal cancer in Switzerland despite declining incidence in older adults: A nationwide population-based study, 1980-2021.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 41946179 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[16]
Ögren JÅ, Ekström J, Rameika N et al.. “Composite proteomic and metabolomic plasma biomarkers for detection of colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers.” Molecular cancer (2026). PMID: 41943016 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[17]
McSorley ST, Burton P, Chantler D et al.. “Faecal haemoglobin-based referral and investigation prioritisation is associated with colorectal cancer-specific survival in symptomatic patients: a retrospective observational study.” British journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 41927996 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[18]
Zohar K, Strecker M, Wartmann T et al.. “Globo-H diagnostic stratification and identification of DUSP14 as a candidate target in colorectal cancer.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 41922912 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[19]
Lv Y, Wang F, Shen Y et al.. “Redefining the role of carbon nanoparticles in colorectal cancer surgery: From lymph node yield to diagnostic paradox.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41921381 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[20]
Nnene K, Nagar B, Boutall A et al.. “Treatment cost of colon cancer at a South African tertiary academic hospital.” Journal of cancer policy (2026). PMID: 41903647 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Definition, Synonyms, and Classification
[21]
Chen X, Liu C, Liao H. “Risk of high-grade infections in colorectal cancer patients treated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41959919 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[22]
Li G, Zhang W, Wang J et al.. “Prognostic role of statins in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41930205 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[23]
Zhou Y, Sang S, Yuan M et al.. “Effects of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation on perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a study protocol for a double-blind, prospective, single-centre, randomised controlled trial.” BMJ open (2026). PMID: 41942155 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup, Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[24]
Cairat M, Olivier E, Neau J et al.. “Systemic glucocorticoid use and risk of site-specific cancers: a methodological systematic review of observational studies.” Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology (2026). PMID: 41931525 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[25]
Liu X, Shuai J, Wang D et al.. “Incidence, risk factors, and a predictive nomogram for stoma-site incisional hernia after ileostomy reversal: A retrospective study.” Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery (2026). PMID: 41995917 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[26]
Charalambidi M, Hukkinen T, Kaprio T et al.. “Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer in Sweden and Finland: A Multicentre Retrospective Cohort Study Over Three Decades.” Journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41928416 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[27]
Khan AA, Hasan F, Marsool MDM et al.. “Enhanced adenoma detection with Endocuff Vision: a GRADE assessed systematic review and meta-analysis.” Clinical endoscopy (2026). PMID: 41956736 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Prevention and Screening
[28]
Zhang X, Wang P, Yu M et al.. “[Effect of electroacupuncture on intestinal function after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery].” Zhongguo zhen jiu = Chinese acupuncture & moxibustion (2026). PMID: 41987441 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup
[29]
Jiang Y, Pu Y, Huang Z et al.. “Clonal tracing of rare anal metastasis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a case report with whole-exome sequencing and multimodal therapy.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41972165 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[30]
Wang J, Yang Y, Yang X et al.. “The effectiveness of innovative educational techniques based on the Transtheoretical Model on the self-care ability of patients with colorectal cancer undergoing ostomy: A randomized controlled trial.” International journal of nursing sciences (2026). PMID: 41938003 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[31]
Lal A, Mudford E, Merga BT et al.. “Long-Term Health and Economic Impacts of COVID-19 Disruptions on Bowel Cancer Inequalities in Victoria, Australia: A Modelling Study.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 41992350 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[32]
Moeckli B, Rocha M, Wassmer CH et al.. “Maternal obesity and the intergenerational risk of cancer: Epidemiologic evidence and mechanistic insights.” Cancer epidemiology (2026). PMID: 41990710 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Etiology and Triggering Factors
[33]
Alatise O, Doyle A, Mohammed T et al.. “A Pilot Randomized Cross-Over Trial Focused on Colonoscopy Skill Acquisition Using High Fidelity Versus Low Fidelity Simulators in Nigeria.” Journal of surgical education (2026). PMID: 41990515 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Prevention and Screening
[34]
Guimarães ACS, Rodrigues LLS, Campos LB et al.. “Beyond Human Papillomavirus (HPV): Detection of EBV and Polyomaviruses in Cervical and Anal Samples.” Journal of medical virology (2026). PMID: 41989205 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup
[35]
Zhang D, Tao P, Li J et al.. “Targeting PKM2-dependent glycolysis reprogrammes monocytes into Cadm1+ macrophages to promote mucosal repair and attenuate colitis progression.” Gut (2026). PMID: 41986135 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[36]
Leja M, Ražuka-Ebela D, Tepes B et al.. “Overview of Gastric Cancer Prevention Initiatives in Europe.” Helicobacter (2026). PMID: 41981861 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[37]
Rifkin S, Anderson SM, Chen X et al.. “Association between Clostridioides difficile Test Positivity and Colorectal Cancer Incidence in a Multisite Hospital-Based Retrospective Cohort Analysis.” Cancer research communications (2026). PMID: 41975657 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[38]
Shin JK, Kim HC, Lee WY et al.. “Calibrated Absolute Risk of Lymph-Node-Metastasis After Non-curative Endoscopic Resection of pT1 Colorectal Cancer.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41973291 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[39]
Hüneburg R, Gieffers-Löwen J, Aretz S et al.. “Longitudinal Surveillance of Gastric Polyposis in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: Incidence, Progression, and Endoscopic Outcomes.” United European gastroenterology journal (2026). PMID: 41972342 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Workup
[40]
Zhang B, Zhao Z, Yin P et al.. “Benchmarking progress in cause-specific cancers in China: a nationwide analysis of premature mortality from 1990 to 2023.” The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific (2026). PMID: 41970458 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[41]
Anderson SM, Cing Z, Drewes JL et al.. “Clostridioides difficile Detection in a Human CRC Cohort.” Open forum infectious diseases (2026). PMID: 41969757 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[42]
Wullaert L, van Leeuwen L, de Weerd V et al.. “Presurgical levels of circulating tumour DNA in patients with resectable chemotherapy-naïve colorectal liver metastases: association with multiorgan recurrence and survival in the MIRACLE cohort.” The British journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 41967049 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[43]
Zhang HX, Xu WJ, Jiang YX et al.. “Pyroptosis as a double-edged sword in colorectal cancer: Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities.” Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death (2026). PMID: 41966661 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[44]
Piovani D, Figlioli G, Nikolopoulos GK et al.. “Global, regional, and national burden of colorectal cancer attributable to central obesity: a population attributable fraction analysis.” BMC medicine (2026). PMID: 41963940 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[45]
Schootman M, Li C, Peng C et al.. “Poverty and Mortality Risk in Patients With Colorectal Cancer.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 41961497 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[46]
Seum T, Mandic M, Safizadeh F et al.. “At what age should people with obesity start colorectal cancer screening?” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 41957948 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[47]
Gupta S, Liu L, Demb J et al.. “Colorectal Cancer and Mortality Risk Among Older Adults With vs Without Adenoma on Prior Colonoscopy.” JAMA (2026). PMID: 41954928 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Prevention and Screening
[48]
Seitz E, Tsai YY, Sanz-Pamplona R et al.. “Sex differences in the colorectal tumor-associated T cell responses.” Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology (2026). PMID: 41949638 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[49]
Corli O, Caldirola L, Galli F et al.. “Analgesic efficacy in women and men with cancer pain, treated with strong opioids: are there differences?” BMJ oncology (2026). PMID: 41948194 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[50]
van Roermund NS, Angerilli V, Nagtegaal ID et al.. “Prevalence and characteristics of sessile serrated lesions with dysplasia in Dutch fecal immunochemical test-positive screenees.” Endoscopy (2026). PMID: 41946470 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors, Prevention and Screening
[51]
Santos I, Liberal J, Teixeira P et al.. “The Role of the Gut Microbiome in Clinical Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review (2020-2025).” Oncology research (2026). PMID: 41799504 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[52]
Tustumi F, Park A, Nakamura ET et al.. “Safety and efficacy of chemoprevention for familial adenomatous polyposis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Annals of coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41802305 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[53]
Chen Y, Wang YT, Hu JY et al.. “Modulating the gut microbiota to enhance immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in colorectal cancer: mechanisms, therapeutic strategies, and clinical perspectives.” Gut microbes (2026). PMID: 41981741 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[54]
Engin ED, Engin AB, Engin A. “Immune Evasion of Helicobacter pylori and Extra-Gastric Cancer Risk.” Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology (2026). PMID: 41972361 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[55]
Wuyi W, Tao P. “Microbe-driven immune suppression in colorectal cancer: the Fusobacterium nucleatum playbook.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41958661 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[56]
Cummings LC, Freedman SD. “Increased gastrointestinal cancer risk in cystic fibrosis: Screening, prevention, and future directions.” Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society (2026). PMID: 41927358 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Prevention and Screening
[57]
Neufert C, Neurath MF. “Pathophysiology of colitis-associated colorectal cancer.” Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 41922722 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[58]
Loaiza-Bonilla A, Leyfman Y, Cortiana V et al.. “Defining a Multi-Omic, AI-Enabled Stool Screening Paradigm for Colorectal Cancer: A Consensus Framework for Clinical Translation.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41899514 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[59]
Li SWL, Au OTH, Lau EYT et al.. “Interplay Between Gut Microbiota and Cholesterol Metabolism in Colorectal Cancer.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41898417 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[60]
Žukauskaitė K, Rauduvytė K, Baušys A et al.. “Surgery and the Gastrointestinal Microbiome in Cancer: Bidirectional Impacts and Therapeutic Opportunities - a Narrative Review.” Surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41895157 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[61]
Khalil M, Baffy G, JohnBritto JS et al.. “Potential far-reaching metabolic consequences of cholecystectomy.” European journal of clinical investigation (2026). PMID: 41888988 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[62]
Sun S, Long F, Su B et al.. “The gut microbiome in colorectal anastomotic leakage: from mechanisms to precision.” Frontiers in medicine (2026). PMID: 41877779 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[63]
Dalamaga M, Rozani S, Petropoulou D. “Why Is Colorectal Cancer Occurring Earlier? Metabolic Dysfunction, Underrecognized Carcinogens, and Emerging Controversies.” Current obesity reports (2026). PMID: 41857189 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[64]
Fujiyoshi K, Sudo T, Shimamura S et al.. “A paradigm shift in genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer: the impact of germline multigene panel testing on diagnosis and management.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 41840140 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[65]
Li X, Wang Q, Yuan Q et al.. “The intratumoral microbiome in colorectal cancer: origins, microenvironmental interactions, and new horizons in precision medicine.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41836398 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[66]
Salazar-Ulbrich N, Haro-Solis D, Aguayo F et al.. “Genotoxic Bacteria and Oncogenic Viruses in Colorectal Cancer: Evidence, Gaps, and a Proposed Interaction Model.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41828495 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[67]
Cataldi C, Karaoğlan BB, Liotta E et al.. “Decoding Immunotherapy Response in Colorectal Cancer: Translational Insights Beyond MSI.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41827785 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[68]
Houlston RS, Dunlop MG. “Colonoscopy surveillance in Lynch syndrome: what it prevents and what it does not.” Journal of medical genetics (2026). PMID: 41825943 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[69]
Huo T, Huang X, Liao J et al.. “The bidirectional effects and mechanisms of the oral and gut microbiomes: a narrative review.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41808841 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[70]
Campos FG, Martinez CAR, Moura RN et al.. “Pouch cancer in familial adenomatous polyposis. Incidence, risk factors and literature review: a propos of three rare cases.” Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery (2026). PMID: 41983869 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Supportive Care and Complication Management
[71]
Hashimoto H, Koda H, Nakajima K et al.. “Appendiceal Goblet Cell Adenocarcinoma With Mismatch Repair Deficiency and Microsatellite Instability-High Status: A Novel Molecular Signature Guiding Immuno-Oncology Strategy.” Pathology international (2026). PMID: 41872678 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[72]
Chelluri R, Kovell S, Montanaro F et al.. “Upper tract urothelial carcinoma associated with Lynch syndrome.” Current opinion in oncology (2026). PMID: 41920568 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors, Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[73]
Han JY, Kim MJ, Park JW et al.. “Gut microbiome in colorectal cancer: recent advances and clinical implications.” Annals of coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41802308 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[74]
Wang X, Wei M, Yi Y et al.. “Elephant-derived Bacillus licheniformis modulates immune cells shedding light on cancer resistance.” Frontiers in microbiology (2026). PMID: 41994282 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[75]
Park SB, Koo HS, Kim DS et al.. “A Clinicopathologic, Molecular, and Prognostic Comparison Between Early- and Late-Onset Colorectal Cancer in Korea: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 41827154 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[76]
Nikolouzakis TK, Souglakos J, Kantidakis EE et al.. “Metastatic Odyssey: Decoding the Genomic Journey from Primary Colorectal Cancer to Disseminated Disease.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41976285 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[77]
Kendsersky ND, Erlick MR, Chen EY et al.. “The Evolving Role for Repeat Molecular Testing in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41899608 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[78]
Aktar S, Masoudi M, Moti D et al.. “Genetic Alterations Involved in Immune Escape Mechanisms of Circulating Tumour Cells in Colorectal Carcinogenesis.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 41834250 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[79]
Zhao Y, Sui JF, Wu DN et al.. “Immuno-neural mechanisms in gastrointestinal tumorigenesis: bridging inflammation, neural regulation, and therapeutic innovation.” Frontiers in immunology (2025). PMID: 41799687 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[80]
Abbas H, Ahmed H, Shuja H et al.. “Comparative efficacy and safety of nivolumab-based combination therapies (with ipilimumab or binimetinib) in patients with microsatellite-stable and microsatellite-instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico (2026). PMID: 41934582 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[81]
Gu F, Chen Z, Lim X et al.. “Chinese Herbal Medicine in Ulcerative Colitis-Associated Carcinogenesis Treatment: Mechanisms, Progress, and Future Directions.” Drug design, development and therapy (2026). PMID: 41908932 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[82]
Xiong C, Wang W, Cha X et al.. “Pathological complete response following immunotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H ascending colon primary squamous cell carcinoma: a case report.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41958654 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Diagnosis and Workup, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[83]
Bai L, Yan X, Wang Z et al.. “The Dual Role of DNA Hypermethylation and Hypomethylation in Colorectal and Gastric Tumorigenesis: Mechanisms and Non-Invasive Biomarker.” Frontiers in bioscience (Landmark edition) (2026). PMID: 41914278 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[84]
Whitmer R, Sepulveda J, Gandhi J et al.. “Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer: Clinically Relevant Diagnostic and Prognostic Molecular Features, and the Future of Precision Medicine.” Journal of personalized medicine (2026). PMID: 41893000 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[85]
Kim SY. “Immunotherapy for microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer: overcoming resistance and exploring novel therapeutic strategies.” Annals of coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41802306 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[86]
Iglesias Coma M, Badia-Ramentol J, Martinez-Ciarpaglini C et al.. “Stromal biomarker-based framework for identifying pMMR/MSS and dMMR/MSI colorectal cancers with poor outcomes and limited benefit from immunotherapy.” Gut (2026). PMID: 41980760 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[87]
Nasca V, Ambrosini M, Taieb J et al.. “Mucinous histology and resistance to immune checkpoint blockade in patients with microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer.” The oncologist (2026). PMID: 41978558 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[88]
Xu T, Xie X, Gu X et al.. “Combined RAS and SMAD4 Mutations and Microsatellite Instability Predict Outcomes in Colorectal Lung Metastases Treated with Image-Guided Thermal Ablation.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41975044 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Diagnosis and Workup
[89]
Li X, Xie M, Kang JX et al.. “Bifidobacterium catenulatum boosts anti-PD-1 efficacy in microsatellite stable colorectal cancer via activating CD8+ T cells.” Gut (2026). PMID: 41956809 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[90]
Ma M, Wang M, Yang Y et al.. “PVT1-104aa derived from the 8q24 gene desert promotes colorectal cancer tumorigenesis.” Clinical and translational medicine (2026). PMID: 41952439 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[91]
Ambrosini M, Gallois C, Gandini A et al.. “From clusters to clinic: An 8-gene signature combined with mucinous component stratifies benefit of anti-CTLA-4 addition to anti-PD-1 in dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 41950572 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[92]
Han K, Zhu C, Xu Z et al.. “A CT-based model integrating deep learning features radiomics and body composition for preoperative prediction of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: a multicenter study.” European journal of radiology (2026). PMID: 41935453 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[93]
Walden D, Batalini F, Eslinger C et al.. “Survival in Patients With Low Expression of Wild-Type Homologous Recombination Genes: Refining the Homologous Recombination Paradigm in Colorectal Cancer.” JCO precision oncology (2026). PMID: 41931743 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[94]
Yang X, Zhang T, Sun H et al.. “Hsa-miR-99a deficiency contributes to MSI-H colorectal cancer progression by activating the mTOR pathway and inducing Th1/Th2 imbalance.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41924263 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[95]
Hong ZG, Xiao B, Zheng M et al.. “Risk and Management of Bowel Obstruction in Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Immunotherapy: A Cross-Sectional Multicenter Study.” ImmunoTargets and therapy (2026). PMID: 41924184 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[96]
Zhan Q, Zhang S, Cao B et al.. “Single-Cell Multi-Tissue T Cell Clonal Dynamics Reveal Distinct Immune Coercion Landscapes in MSI and MSS Colorectal Cancer.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41898550 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[97]
Petäinen L, Väyrynen JP, Böhm J et al.. “dMMR prediction from colorectal cancer histopathology: Leveraging non-tumor and low-magnification regions.” Computer methods and programs in biomedicine (2026). PMID: 41875848 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[98]
Yanagisawa T, Okamoto T, Hayashi K. “Effectiveness of exercise interventions in patients with colorectal cancer during adjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41860634 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: History and Physical Examination, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy, Supportive Care and Complication Management
[99]
Batrakoulis A, Perivoliotis K, Courneya KS et al.. “Comparative Efficacy of Various Exercise Types on Psychophysiological Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Network Meta-Analysis.” Medicine and science in sports and exercise (2026). PMID: 41289064 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: History and Physical Examination
[100]
Ortega-Macías AG, Toro AV, Ghosh N et al.. “Addition of dexmedetomidine to anesthesia regimen reduces pain level after endoscopic submucosal dissection: A systematic review and meta analysis.” Journal of clinical anesthesia (2026). PMID: 41260073 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: History and Physical Examination
[101]
Varghese TS, Faithfull S, Frampton A et al.. “Association of patient factors and health-related quality of life with weight changes during chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: secondary analysis of the SCOT trial.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41711962 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[102]
Li J, Jiang H, Song QL et al.. “Individualized intraoperative blood pressure control with norepinephrine reduces kidney injury biomarkers but not creatinine-defined acute kidney injury in older patients with hypertension undergoing major abdominal surgery: a single-center randomized controlled trial.” BMC anesthesiology (2026). PMID: 41491434 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[103]
Koutoukidis DA, Jebb SA, Reynolds S et al.. “Preoperative Weight Loss in Patients With Excess Weight and Colorectal Cancer: The CARE Feasibility Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA network open (2025). PMID: 41359334 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[104]
Wu Y, Tian B, Li L et al.. “Efficacy and safety of lidocaine versus sufentanil in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.” BMC anesthesiology (2025). PMID: 41318377 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[105]
Zhu X, Zhao S, Tang R et al.. “Effectiveness of Orem's self-care model nursing combined with nutritional intervention in postoperative patients with colorectal cancer.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2025). PMID: 41014371 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[106]
Wang H, Wu C, Zhou S et al.. “Body mass index and early-onset colorectal cancer risk: a systematic review and cohort-based meta-analysis.” Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41603036 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: History and Physical Examination
[107]
Nihei S, Ujiie H, Saito K et al.. “A Prospective Comparison of Azilsartan and Amlodipine for Bevacizumab-induced Hypertension and Proteinuria in Colorectal Cancer.” In vivo (Athens, Greece) (2026). PMID: 41482380 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[108]
Li M, Wang W, Yang Y et al.. “Efficacy of bupivacaine liposome transversus abdominis plane block in enhancing postoperative recovery following laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection.” Langenbeck's archives of surgery (2025). PMID: 41042339 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[109]
Sun Y, Xu Z, Tang Y et al.. “Unveiling the impact of body mass index on surgical difficulty and oncological prognosis in low rectal cancer: post-hoc analysis of the LASRE trial.” International journal of colorectal disease (2025). PMID: 40844625 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[110]
Beni R, Sekhon Inderjit Singh HK, Harper H et al.. “Evaluating the clinical use and safety of LumenEye in an outpatient colorectal clinic: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41796404 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[111]
Zhu C, Thong MSY, Doege D et al.. “Lifestyle factors and all-cause mortality in long-term cancer survivors: a population-based prospective cohort study.” European journal of epidemiology (2026). PMID: 41579289 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[112]
Hjorth CF, Olsen MH, Ulrichsen SP et al.. “Body mass index and colorectal cancer recurrence and mortality: A nationwide cohort study in Denmark.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 41273020 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: History and Physical Examination
[113]
Shinozaki S, Watanabe J, Kanno T et al.. “Comparative Performance of Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection Systems for Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.” Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (2026). PMID: 41906553 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[114]
Hsu WF, Kuo CY, Yen HH et al.. “Computer-Assisted Colonoscopy in High-Adenoma Detection Rate Settings in a High-Risk Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 41984482 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[115]
Gerritse SL, van Meerten E, Duits AJ et al.. “The Keynote-177 Randomized Controlled Trial of First-line PD-1 Blockade for Microsatellite-High or Mismatch Repair-Deficient Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Potential Consequences of the Cross-Over Trial Design and Related Issues.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 41980913 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Supportive Care and Complication Management, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes, Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[116]
Majano Díaz L, Rodríguez de Santiago E, Núñez Rodríguez H et al.. “Temporary interruption versus maintenance of anticoagulation in polypectomy of colorectal lesions: study protocol for a multicentre randomised non-inferiority clinical trial POLYPHEM.” BMJ open (2026). PMID: 41916623 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Landmark Trials and Key Evidence, Prevention and Screening
[117]
Marinho B, Velho G, Santos MD. “Cutaneous Manifestations as a Sentinel of Colorectal Cancer: A Case Report.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 41977089 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[118]
Günaltili M, Guliyev M, Birsin Z et al.. “Prognostic value of the pretreatment CA19-9/Albumin ratio in de novo metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.” Medicine (2026). PMID: 41961685 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[119]
Li ZF, Guo J, Sun C et al.. “Support vector machine-based MRI radiomics predict response to neoadjuvant therapy and progression-free-survival of Colorectal Liver Metastases patients.” Medical physics (2026). PMID: 41988745 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[120]
Habibzadeh P, Sorkin J, Hsu D. “Association Between Red Blood Cell Distribution Width-To-Albumin Ratio and Breast, Colorectal, Lung, and Prostate Cancers.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 41981727 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[121]
Gurayah AA, An A, Kuchakulla M et al.. “Barriers to Health Care and Cancer Screening.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 41979877 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[122]
Xinmo F, Minghua B, Xu Q et al.. “Integrative Multiomics and Single-Cell Analyses Identify FKBP10 as a Predictor of Radiotherapy Outcome in Colorectal Cancer.” Human mutation (2026). PMID: 41969611 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[123]
Ewing AP, Tounkara F, Lawrence WR et al.. “Colorectal Cancer Screening and Health-Related Social Needs in a National Sample of US Adults.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 41954935 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[124]
Nakajo S, Uemura M, Kusafuka H et al.. “Hypoxic CAF studies unveil PTHrP‑vitamin D‑RAS axis as pivotal in the CAF.” Oncology reports (2026). PMID: 41952490 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[125]
Ferrera L, Martínez-Riveros H, Saña M et al.. “Concordance and Acceptability of Self- Vs. Clinician-Collected Anorectal Swabs for HPV Genotyping in Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in Metropolitan Barcelona.” Journal of medical virology (2026). PMID: 41949383 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[126]
Klausch T, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Coupé VMH. “A Bayesian Prevalence-Incidence Mixture Model for Screening Outcomes With Misclassification.” Statistics in medicine (2026). PMID: 41943977 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[127]
Townsend JS, Puckett MC, Coleman King SM et al.. “Knowledge, Symptom Awareness, and Referral Practices of Primary Care Providers in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.” Population health management (2026). PMID: 41943394 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Prevention and Screening
[128]
Huang CY, Qiu XS, Lu SW et al.. “Lymph-vascular invasion affects the selection of time interval between surgery and postoperative chemotherapy in colon cancer.” Current problems in surgery (2026). PMID: 41942244 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Management: Surgical and Local Therapies, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[129]
Yue Y, Sun Y, Huang Y et al.. “Safety and feasibility of combined transanal total mesorectal excision with delayed coloanal anastomosis in high-risk patients with low rectal cancer.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41940995 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Management: Surgical and Local Therapies, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[130]
Grießhammer E, Bogovic N, Geissler EK et al.. “Compartment-specific GLUT1 patterns in colorectal liver metastases: invasive-margin GLUT1 associates with outcome in solitary disease.” Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII (2026). PMID: 41940986 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[131]
Yu H, Reider L, Asenbaum U et al.. “Simultaneous microwave ablation and liver resection in patients with colorectal liver metastases.” HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association (2026). PMID: 41934995 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[132]
Dhar E, Kabir MA, Nadar DR et al.. “Exploring Machine Learning Approaches for Decision Support in Neoadjuvant Therapy of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.” Oncology research (2026). PMID: 41930174 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Diagnosis and Workup, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[133]
Gergő D, Tóth-Mészáros A, Schulze Wenning A et al.. “Efficacy and Safety of L-Menthol During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.” Journal of clinical medicine (2025). PMID: 40566063 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[134]
Thorndal C, Schelde-Olesen B, Kaalby L et al.. “Colon capsule endoscopy compared with conventional colonoscopy in patients with colonic diverticulitis: a randomized controlled superiority trial on patient-reported outcomes.” Endoscopy (2026). PMID: 40907531 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[135]
De Silva R, Thomas JP, Murali N et al.. “The prevalence of nonmalignant gastrointestinal disease in patients with iron deficiency anemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 41784434 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[136]
Shinagawa T, Okada S, Shiratori H et al.. “Statistics and epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal neoplasia.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 41721152 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[137]
Neurath MF. “New insights into Th9 cells in inflammatory bowel diseases.” Seminars in immunology (2026). PMID: 41406701 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[138]
Marafini I, Frascatani R, Colella M et al.. “Bromodomain-containing 4 as a therapeutic target in inflammatory bowel diseases and colorectal cancer.” Frontiers in pharmacology (2025). PMID: 41311847 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[139]
Lopetuso LR, Murgiano M, Mantuano E et al.. “The Molecular Landscape of Inflammation in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD): Targets for Precision Medicine.” Biomedicines (2025). PMID: 41301831 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[140]
Wang Q, Meng Q, Chen Y et al.. “Interaction between gut microbiota and immunity in health and intestinal disease.” Frontiers in immunology (2025). PMID: 41293162 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[141]
Quagliariello V, Forte P, Ciappina G et al.. “Fusobacteriumnucleatum: Pathophysiological and Clinical Involvement in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Colorectal Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases.” Cancers (2025). PMID: 41154402 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[142]
Triantaphyllopoulos KA, Ragia ND, Panagiotopoulou ME et al.. “Integrating Inflammatory and Epigenetic Signatures in IBD-Associated Colorectal Carcinogenesis: Models, Mechanisms, and Clinical Implications.” International journal of molecular sciences (2025). PMID: 41096771 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[143]
Martinelli M, Cascelli N, Bartolo O et al.. “The Molecular Landscape of Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumors: From Endoscopic Subtypes to Molecular Targets.” International journal of molecular sciences (2025). PMID: 40943367 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[144]
Mariani L, Colombo F, Meuli S et al.. “The role of CT Colonography in the assessment of inflammatory bowel Diseases patients.” European journal of radiology (2025). PMID: 40913942 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[145]
Siyam K, Elessi K, Al-Dahdouh M et al.. “Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing colonoscopy in Gaza Strip hospitals: a retrospective study.” BMC gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41652363 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[146]
Tran NT, Van Thai N, Khuyen NT et al.. “Aberrant TTF-1 expression in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma mimicking primary lung cancer: a case report and review of diagnostic pitfalls.” Diagnostic pathology (2025). PMID: 41310725 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[147]
Suárez M, Martínez R, Torres AM et al.. “Utility of Colonoscopy After Acute Colonic Diverticulitis.” Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) (2026). PMID: 41975762 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Differential Diagnosis
[148]
Tuynman JB, Yao H, Moolenaar LR et al.. “Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer (COLOR III): short-term outcomes of an international, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.” The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 41887239 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[149]
Sinicrope FA, Ou FS, Arnold D et al.. “Atezolizumab plus FOLFOX for Stage III Mismatch Repair-Deficient Colon Cancer.” The New England journal of medicine (2026). PMID: 41880612 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies, Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[150]
Kitaguchi D, Forgione A, Innocenzi C et al.. “The role of complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation in colon cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective trials.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41774976 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[151]
Reali C, Borra P, Francis NK. “Quality assurance of surgical techniques for right colon cancer: Systematic review.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 41891400 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[152]
Matsuda T, Nagatani Y, Funakoshi Y et al.. “Neoadjuvant FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab without radiotherapy for high-risk rectal cancer: multicentre phase II trial.” BJS open (2025). PMID: 41661200 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[153]
Mohammed KB, Kahin M, Okasha AA et al.. “Comparative Efficacy of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.” Cureus (2026). PMID: 41732636 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[154]
Scardino A, Wolthuis A, Taffurelli G et al.. “Readmission rates and predictive factors in older patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: A multicenter European retrospective study.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41795429 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[155]
Zaman O, Zaman S, Ebraheem M et al.. “Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS): Case series on short-term outcomes and systematic review of the literature.” The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland (2026). PMID: 41916806 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies, Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[156]
Al-Ihribat AR, Moqbel I, Oun A et al.. “Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in surgery (2026). PMID: 41822113 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[157]
Liang J, Chen W, Yang J et al.. “Laparoscopic-assisted vs open surgery for synchronous colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study of short-term and long-term outcomes.” BMC gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41851844 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[158]
Butnari V, Mansuri A, Hanson M et al.. “Robotic sigmoid colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: IMV first approach-a video vignette.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41896493 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[159]
Johns J, Lekamalage B, Cribb B et al.. “Anastomotic leak rates between powered and non-powered circular staplers in left-sided colorectal resection; a retrospective cohort study.” The New Zealand medical journal (2026). PMID: 41610291 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[160]
Kuliavas J, Marcinkeviciute K, Vaicekauskaite I et al.. “Increased Risk of Central Mesocolic Lymph Node Metastases in BRAF-Mutated Stage I-III Colon Cancer.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 41977067 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[161]
Kapturkiewicz B, Kazanowski M, Lesiak P et al.. “Analysis of the impact of the learning curve and other factors on the duration of TaTME procedures.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41917328 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[162]
Efetov S, Perez R, Hompes R et al.. “A multinational pilot survey of clinical practice patterns in tumor-specific mesocolic excision and complete lymph node dissection for colorectal cancer.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 41870762 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[163]
Chen WP, Li ZK, Lin L et al.. “The clinical effect and oncological results of preserving inferior mesenteric artery during laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision for patients with descending colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41838213 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[164]
Lohsiriwat V, Kaenla E, Ovartchaiyapong P. “Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Versus Conventional Care in Simultaneous Colorectal Resection and Hepatectomy for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases.” World journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 41831191 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[165]
Dahlberg S, Vedin T, Syk I et al.. “Unplanned intensive care unit admission after elective colon cancer resection: population-based registry study.” BJS open (2025). PMID: 41802244 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[166]
Chen YC, Chang TK, Su WC et al.. “Prognostic Value of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Robotic-Assisted Resection.” Oncology research (2026). PMID: 41799506 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[167]
Chew C, Panesa A, Haq MU et al.. “Feasibility and outcomes of robotic colorectal cancer surgery in patients with high body mass index.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41793538 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[168]
Omura Y, Nakauchi M, Hiro J et al.. “Lateral lymph node dissection via robotic surgery: technical feasibility and patterns of lateral lymph node recurrence in rectal cancer.” Surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41759372 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[169]
Pretta A, Giampieri R, Ziranu P et al.. “Clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with early-onset locally advanced rectal cancer.” Therapeutic advances in medical oncology (2026). PMID: 41743382 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[170]
Slørdahl KS, Balto A, Guren MG et al.. “Patient reported outcomes after treatment for colon cancer - A nationwide study.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41722357 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[171]
Bunjo Z, Seneviratne I, Murshed I et al.. “Statewide analysis of outcomes in patients with early-stage rectal cancer undergoing standard-of-care upfront resection.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41719784 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[172]
Swilling AC, Chalise P, Al-Kasspooles M et al.. “Volume-Outcome Relationships in Total Mesorectal Excision Quality and Grading: A National Cancer Database Study.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41703205 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[173]
Jo MH, Kim HS, Chung SS et al.. “Single-incision robotic complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon neoplasms: technical and oncologic feasibility.” Surgical endoscopy (2026). PMID: 41703038 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[174]
Wang L, Li G, Lv Y et al.. “Optimization of artery-first approach in right-sided colon cancer CME: preoperative CTA assessment of MCA branching and MCV-Henle's trunk relationship.” World journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41699604 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[175]
Ahluwalia AS, Ramesh H, Asad Z et al.. “Assessing the Association of Age and Preoperative Sodium Level on Colectomy Outcomes: An NSQIP Study.” The Journal of surgical research (2026). PMID: 41687140 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[176]
Li Y, Han C, Tang J. “Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with or without PD-1 inhibitors in MMR-proficient non-metastatic rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41853263 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy, Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[177]
Arjona-Sánchez A, Gutiérrez-Calvo A, Segura-Sampedro JJ et al.. “Efficacy and safety of intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for locally advanced colorectal cancer (HIPECT4): final analysis of randomized clinical trial.” BJS open (2025). PMID: 41891861 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[178]
Kito Y, Yamazaki K, Shoji H et al.. “Randomized phase II study of FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus FOLFOXIRI plus ramucirumab as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: WJOG9216G (RECAST).” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 41880871 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[179]
Xicheng W, Yanhong D, Yanqiao Z et al.. “A Randomized Trial of Encorafenib and Cetuximab Versus Irinotecan/Cetuximab or FOLFIRI/Cetuximab in Chinese Patients With BRAFV600E Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The NAUTICAL Study.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 41852303 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy, Supportive Care and Complication Management
[180]
Gregorc V, Majem M, Lo Russo G et al.. “Fulzerasib plus cetuximab in first-line KRASG12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (KROCUS): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1b/2 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2026). PMID: 41926959 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[181]
Chibaudel B, Dourthe LM, André T et al.. “STRATEGIC-1: multiple-line, randomized, open-label GERCOR-PRODIGE-39 phase III trial in unresectable RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.” Signal transduction and targeted therapy (2026). PMID: 41980919 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[182]
Ding L, Peng L, Xu Z et al.. “Interpretable machine-learning prediction of severe myelosuppression in colorectal cancer patients receiving chemotherapy using XGBoost and SHAP: a retrospective study with a web-based calculator.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 41939468 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[183]
Qadri F, Afghan MK, Lutfi A et al.. “Molecular complete response to the RIN protocol (regorafenib, ipilimumab, and nivolumab) in a patient with advanced recurrent metastatic mismatch repair proficient/microsatellite stable (pMMR/MSS) rectal cancer.” Therapeutic advances in medical oncology (2026). PMID: 41883872 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[184]
Cashin PH, Frühling P, Grönlund P et al.. “Preoperative chemotherapy in colorectal peritoneal metastatic disease - a real-world observational cohort study.” Pleura and peritoneum (2026). PMID: 41868813 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[185]
Abbas N, Mourad M, Smaily H et al.. “EGFR Signaling in Colorectal Cancer: Novel Therapeutic Strategies, Predictive Biomarkers, and Counteracting Treatment Resistance.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41977448 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[186]
Yang W, Zhang J, Liang P et al.. “Irinotecan with trifluridine/tipiracil and bevacizumab for second-line metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase II multicenter study.” Signal transduction and targeted therapy (2026). PMID: 41956997 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[187]
Wang Q, Liu Z, Jin K. “Natural Polymers Based Biocompatible Nanomedicines for Targeting Colon Cancer: Prospects and Challenges.” International journal of nanomedicine (2026). PMID: 41939211 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[188]
Cives-Losada C, Soldani C, Polidoro MA et al.. “Understanding the Tumor Microenvironmental Mechanisms Driving Immunotherapy Resistance in Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.” Oncology research (2026). PMID: 41930154 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[189]
Cao M, Alvarez J, Mitra R et al.. “IFNγ-induced antigen loss in chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41924255 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[190]
Funk MA, Heinemann V, Bücklein V et al.. “Gastric and Rectal Administration of Encorafenib with Targeted Chemotherapy against BRAF V600E-Mutant Rectal Cancer with Bowel Obstruction.” The oncologist (2026). PMID: 41920914 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[191]
Kang W, Zhang Z, Li W et al.. “Breaching the immune-cold barrier in pMMR/MSS metastatic colorectal cancer: emerging strategies beyond standard care.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41909713 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[192]
Wang F, Zhang Z, Chen J et al.. “Nanodynamic Therapy in Colorectal Cancer: Engineering Precision Immunotherapy and Multimodal Synergy.” International journal of nanomedicine (2026). PMID: 41907375 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[193]
Wagner AD, Raeisi M, Rakez M et al.. “Sex differences in efficacy and toxicity of first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: An analysis of 18,041 patients in the ARCAD CRC database.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 41903302 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[194]
Kawczak P, Bączek T. “Molecular Targeting of EGFR, BRAF, and HER2 Signaling in Colorectal Cancer: Contemporary Advances with Panitumumab, Encorafenib, and Tucatinib.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 41899309 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[195]
Yeh JH, Hsu CW, Shen CS et al.. “Save the injection needle for colorectal ESD: a multicenter feasibility study of the needleless injection technique using short-tip endoknife.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 41896390 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[196]
Gao S, Liao X, He Y et al.. “The effectiveness of multimodal prehabilitation on functional capacity and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice (2026). PMID: 41872610 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[197]
He Y, Yuan X, Gao S et al.. “Home-based multimodal prehabilitation before colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41870618 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[198]
Lin Y, Tian D, He J et al.. “The invisible wall: experiences of social isolation in colorectal cancer patients with ostomy-a qualitative meta-synthesis.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41817765 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[199]
Xiaobing Y, Qidi L, Liyan L et al.. “The effect of thunder-fire moxibustion on cancer-related fatigue in patients with Qi stagnation and blood stasis type colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41986533 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[200]
Reeves J, Koh C, Smith AB et al.. “Acceptability and Feasibility of a Virtual Multimodal (P)Rehabilitation Programme for Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients: The PRIORITY-CONNECT 2 Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41832362 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[201]
Kubo E, Satomi E, Mukohara T et al.. “Randomized Controlled Trial to Relieve Pain of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy by Magnetic Field: SMILE Study.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41749832 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[202]
Díaz-Sánchez C, Rodríguez-Muñoz PM, Navarro-López V et al.. “Impact of Ostomy on Quality of Life in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) (2026). PMID: 41753958 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[203]
Ben Kridis W, Aboturkia AM, Aqoup MO et al.. “Diet and Physical Activity Interventions to Improve Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial in North Africa.” JCO global oncology (2026). PMID: 41886719 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[204]
Wang C, Nie L, Li X et al.. “Effects of combined dietary fiber and probiotic supplementation on gut microbiota, immune function, and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41823995 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[205]
Peng W, Shi H, Fan L et al.. “Efficacy of a plant-based diet on FOLFOX chemotherapy-induced gastrointestinal toxicity in patients with colorectal cancer: study protocol for a multicentre, stratified, randomised controlled trial.” Trials (2026). PMID: 41772652 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[206]
Addington C, Davies N, Howell P et al.. “Lived experiences of cancer care for people living with HIV who are treated for anal cancer: a scoping review.” BMJ open (2026). PMID: 41916622 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[207]
Noiret B, Perez RO, Conroy T et al.. “Disruptive Analysis of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Clinical and Therapeutic Distinctions Between Low- and Mid-Rectal Cancers.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41791024 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[208]
Wu Y, Pang J, Li J et al.. “Curcumin for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: From Mechanism to Clinic.” The American journal of Chinese medicine (2026). PMID: 41757464 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[209]
Sokólska W, Gudowska-Sawczuk M, Orywal K. “Cytokines and Chemokines as Emerging Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Colorectal Cancer-Narrative Review.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 41752132 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[210]
Chen H, Wang Q, Chen Y et al.. “Risk factors and prediction model for early high-output stoma after colorectal cancer surgery: A retrospective study.” Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing (2026). PMID: 41858760 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[211]
Li Y, Zou D, Hu J et al.. “A multimodal neoadjuvant strategy incorporating PDT, RFA, and ICIs results in a notable pathological response and preservation of the sphincter in microsatellite stable low rectal cancer: A highly distinctive case report and literature review.” Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy (2026). PMID: 41833681 ↗
L4CASE_REPORTCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[212]
Pan S, Wang G. “Perioperative Systemic Stress Phenotypes Predict Immune Recovery Failure, Molecular Residual Disease, and Long-Term Outcomes After Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.” World journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 41917719 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[213]
Burlaka A, Zemskov S, Rozhkova V et al.. “Laparoscopic versus open minor liver resections of colorectal cancer liver metastases in a state at war: A prospective cohort study.” Surgery open science (2026). PMID: 41971756 ↗
L2bCOHORTCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[214]
Shan S, Fu S, Ma Z et al.. “Temporally Programmed and Laser-Triggered Immunomodulatory Hydrogel Enables Synergistic Wound Healing and Prevention of Postoperative Tumor Recurrence.” ACS applied materials & interfaces (2026). PMID: 41995291 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[215]
AlAwadhi HK, Chang NH, Jogendran M et al.. “Gastroenterology/Hepatology: What You May Have Missed in 2025.” Annals of internal medicine (2026). PMID: 41974014 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[216]
Moretto R, Studiale V, Hyun SW et al.. “Circulating tumor DNA dynamics in patients with liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer resected after first-line systemic treatment.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2026). PMID: 41973053 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[217]
Machida E, Takamizawa Y, Takayanagi D et al.. “Microbiomic and immunogenic biomarkers of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy in stage III colorectal cancer.” JNCI cancer spectrum (2026). PMID: 41965123 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[218]
Zhu G, Liu Y, Shi Y et al.. “Dissecting tumor heterogeneity in colorectal cancer: uncovering the role of BCL2L1+ cells through single-cell analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 41958675 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[219]
Aref AT, Pathan M, Habib R et al.. “Proteomics-Driven Risk Stratification in Stage III Colon Cancer: A Validated Prognostic Signature for Recurrence Prediction using three independent cohorts.” Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research (2026). PMID: 41954643 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[220]
Liu Z, Gao D, Martin T et al.. “Impact of Rural Hospital Closures on Survival Among Medicare Beneficiaries Diagnosed With Colorectal, Lung, Breast, and Prostate Cancer.” The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association (2026). PMID: 41947577 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[221]
Wang J, Li Y, Liu X et al.. “Methylated Septin9 as an auxiliary biomarker for the diagnostic, recurrence monitoring and prognosis of colorectal cancer.” Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry (2026). PMID: 41941932 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[222]
Lu J, Wang R, Chong YY. “Effects of psychosocial interventions on cancer-related fatigue in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 41840094 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[223]
Xun X, Wang R, Cheng Q et al.. “The Impact of Prehabilitation on Postoperative Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.” Journal of the American Medical Directors Association (2026). PMID: 41698408 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[224]
Blanchard-Cavagis ER, Abrahão Reis PC, Visani FLV et al.. “Adjuvant aspirin and Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in resected, PIK3CA-mutated colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Critical reviews in oncology/hematology (2026). PMID: 41621633 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[225]
Li Y, Ho K, Lui TK et al.. “Comparison of Image-Enhanced Endoscopy Techniques for Colorectal Lesion Detection and Characterization: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.” The American journal of gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41472621 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[226]
Srinivasan A, Yi KM, Sharma D et al.. “Integrating multimodal prehabilitation into enhanced recovery after surgery programs (MPhERAS) for elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies.” Techniques in coloproctology (2025). PMID: 41455772 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[227]
Mirza W, Iqbal H, Yasmin S et al.. “Indocyanine green fluorescence-guided perfusion vs. standard assessment to prevent clinical anastomotic leak after colorectal resection: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with site-specific subgroup analysis.” World journal of surgical oncology (2025). PMID: 41422225 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[228]
Li T, Yin L, Li Y et al.. “Folate exposures and risk of colorectal cancer: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational studies and randomised controlled trials.” BMJ open (2025). PMID: 41314820 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[229]
Garfinkle R, Balvardi S, Carmichael H et al.. “Outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials of rectal cancer treatment: A scoping review for the CORRECT initiative.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 41564846 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[230]
Zhang X, Zhou J, Geng J et al.. “Feasibility of ctDNA-guided precision neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: Insights from the ongoing CINTS-R trial.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 41435753 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[231]
Zhang T, Shi L, Jian L et al.. “Clinical Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness of FOLFOX Versus LCCRT in Neoadjuvant Treatment for Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: An Economic Analysis of the FOWARC and PROSPECT Trial.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 41379261 ↗
L1bRCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[232]
Huang Y, Yang X, Qin S et al.. “Effect of Perioperative Glutamine-Enhanced Parenteral Nutrition on Short-Term Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.” Technology in cancer research & treatment (2026). PMID: 41891764 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[233]
Abideen ZU, Waseem MH, Shoaib A et al.. “Comparing various bowel preparation regimens in constipated patients undergoing colonoscopy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 41684308 ↗
L1aSR_MA_RCTCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[234]
Garfinkle R, George M, Jethwa K et al.. “Development of a CORe outcome set for clinical trials of RECTal cancer treatment: protocol for the CORRECT initiative.” BMJ open (2026). PMID: 41974548 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[235]
Chen YD, He ZY, Zhao WJ et al.. “Qu-Shi-Jie-Du Decoction for Prevention of Recurrence and Metastasis in High-Risk Stage II/III Colon Cancer: Study Protocol for a Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.” Integrative cancer therapies (2026). PMID: 41810508 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[236]
Shimomura M, Ishikawa S, Miguchi M et al.. “Possible preventive effect of surgical glove compression therapy on oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy: study protocol of a multicentre, phase II/III, randomised controlled trial-the Hiroshima Surgical Study Group of Clinical Oncology (HiSCO)-12 trial.” BMJ open (2026). PMID: 41698721 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[237]
Abdulla R, Boxtha C, Courtney EP et al.. “Multilevel Action Toward Colorectal Cancer and Hepatitis C Education and Screening (MATCHES): Study protocol for a hybrid 1 stepped-wedge multibehavioral randomized trial.” Contemporary clinical trials (2026). PMID: 41692274 ↗
L2bTRIAL_NONRANDOMCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[238]
Guntupalli Y, Nimmagadda R, Potluri V et al.. “Blood-Based Circulating Tumor DNA for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland) (2026). PMID: 41911100 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Prevention and Screening
[239]
Majsniarova Z, Minarikova D, Minarik P et al.. “Pharmacist-Led Interventions for Colorectal Cancer Prevention: A Systematic Review.” Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) (2026). PMID: 41892205 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Prevention and Screening
[240]
Ramai D, Pan CW, Rodriguez B et al.. “Interventions for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.” Gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41932450 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Prevention and Screening
[241]
Carbone F, Ciardiello D, Granieri S et al.. “Blood-based circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) tests for colorectal cancer screening: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.” Critical reviews in oncology/hematology (2026). PMID: 41881272 ↗
L2aSR_OBSCited in: Prevention and Screening
[242]
Greene M, Gameng L, Nowd P et al.. “Adherence to Obstetrician-/Gynecologist-Ordered Multi-target Stool DNA Test Screening and Follow-Up Colonoscopy: A National Multi-payer Study of US Women.” Advances in therapy (2026). PMID: 41984312 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[243]
Liao TE, Chuang C, Liu SY et al.. “Klebsiella Pneumoniae Liver Abscess as the Herald of Underlying Colorectal Neoplasm.” Open forum infectious diseases (2026). PMID: 41983149 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[244]
Devall MA, Taha HM, Chen M et al.. “Interrogating the mechanistic link between neighborhood deprivation and colorectal cancer risk through transcriptomic analysis of normal colorectal biopsies.” Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology (2026). PMID: 41979606 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[245]
Vickers AL, Fichera A. “The Evolution of the Management of Dysplasia in Ulcerative Colitis.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 41976387 ↗
L5REVIEW_NARRATIVECited in: Prevention and Screening
[246]
Xu S, Gong L, Lu Y et al.. “A simplified multitarget stool test for colorectal cancer and advanced precancerous lesion detection.” Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine (2026). PMID: 41965119 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[247]
Li X, Zhao Z, Stassen L et al.. “Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic value of fecal and serum carcinoembryonic antigen for colorectal cancer detection.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 41957956 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[248]
Kim J, Mabiala-Maye G, Michaud T et al.. “Using a cross-sectoral partnership to improve colorectal cancer screening and follow-up among African Americans in the United States: A protocol and preliminary results.” Preventive medicine reports (2026). PMID: 41953108 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[249]
Pi-Chun Chuang M, Hsu WF, Su CW et al.. “Fecal Hemoglobin-Guided Precision Post-polypectomy Surveillance within the Current Framework: A Four-Million-Participant FIT-based Screening Study.” Gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41932453 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[250]
Lux TJ, Saßmannshausen Z, Kafetzis I et al.. “Artificial intelligence assisted colorectal lesion detection in private practices a randomized controlled study.” NPJ digital medicine (2026). PMID: 41922731 ↗
L5OTHERCited in: Prevention and Screening
[251]
de Jong R, De Roover R, Devlin L et al.. “ESTRO technical guideline: intensity modulated radiotherapy and image guided radiotherapy for rectal cancer.” Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (2026). PMID: 41662929 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[252]
Kennecke H, Delpassand E, Felder S et al.. “NANETS Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of stage I-III rectal neuroendocrine tumors.” Endocrine-related cancer (2026). PMID: 41562331 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[253]
Huo B, Arezzo A, Sochorova D et al.. “EAES, ESCP, and ESGAR clinical practice guideline update on taTME for rectal cancer.” Surgical endoscopy (2026). PMID: 41413298 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[254]
Tanakaya K, Yamaguchi T, Hirata K et al.. “Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2024 for the clinical practice of hereditary colorectal cancer.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 41214301 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[255]
Korngold EK, Kambadakone AR, Berlin J et al.. “ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Staging and Disease Monitoring of Rectal Cancer.” Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR (2025). PMID: 41193050 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[256]
Korngold EK, Kambadakone AR, Berlin J et al.. “ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Staging and Disease Monitoring of Colon Cancer and Appendiceal Cancer.” Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR (2025). PMID: 41193049 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[257]
Kinugasa Y, Uehara K, Yamaguchi K et al.. “Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2024 for the treatment of colorectal cancer.” International journal of clinical oncology (2025). PMID: 41186794 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[258]
Poynten IM, Turner RC, Varma R et al.. “Australian guidelines for anal cancer screening using anal human papillomavirus testing with cytology triage in people living with HIV.” HIV medicine (2025). PMID: 41130598 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[259]
Ngamruengphong S, Othman MO, Wang AY et al.. “AGA Clinical Practice Update on Endoscopic Resection for Early Colorectal Cancer: Commentary.” Gastroenterology (2025). PMID: 41114683 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[260]
Gallon R, McCormick L, Saetta A et al.. “EMQN best practice guidelines for analysis and reporting of microsatellite instability in solid tumours.” European journal of human genetics : EJHG (2026). PMID: 40836023 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[261]
Mussetto A, Radaelli F, Galloro G et al.. “SIED-GISCOR recommendations for colonoscopy in screening programs: Part 2 - Endoscopic treatment.” Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (2025). PMID: 40784850 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[262]
Gambella A, Parente P, Grillo F et al.. “Pathology of the malignant colorectal polyp: Issues in morphologic criteria and recommendations from the Italian Group of Gastrointestinal Pathologists.” Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (2025). PMID: 40769863 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[263]
Wach MM, Dineen SP. “ASO Practice Guideline Series: Management of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.” Annals of surgical oncology (2025). PMID: 40587073 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[264]
Godfrey EL, Mahoney F, Bansal VV et al.. “Consensus guideline for the management of patients with appendiceal tumors, part 2: Appendiceal tumors with peritoneal involvement.” Cancer (2025). PMID: 40558065 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[265]
Mali J, Valadão M, Araujo RO et al.. “Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology: Guidelines for the Lymphadenectomy in Colorectal Cancer.” Journal of surgical oncology (2025). PMID: 40521833 ↗
L1cGUIDELINECited in: Guidelines and Resources
[266]
Calderwood AH, Yoshida CM, Das KK et al.. “AGA Clinical Practice Update on Surveillance of Metaplastic and Premalignant Conditions of the Esophagus and Colorectum in Older Adults: Expert Review.” Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association (2026). PMID: 42545305 ↗
L1cCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[267]
Levin TR, Ciemins E, Dominitz J et al.. “Improving follow-up of abnormal stool test results used for colorectal cancer screening.” Gastrointestinal endoscopy (2026). PMID: 42524792 ↗
L1cCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[268]
Abdelrahim M, Esmail A, Mustafa N et al.. “Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of Different Third-Line Management Options for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Reconstructed Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 42512271 ↗
L1aCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[269]
Ng K, Ou FS, Zemla T et al.. “Addition of High-Dose Vitamin D3 to Standard Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The SOLARIS Randomized Clinical Trial (Alliance A021703).” JAMA (2026). PMID: 42545685 ↗
L2bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[270]
Li H, Cai Y, Wang Y et al.. “Electroacupuncture for Postoperative Gastrointestinal Recovery After Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial Electroacupuncture Fastens Recovery.” Diseases of the colon and rectum (2026). PMID: 42559736 ↗
L1bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[271]
Zhai D, Feng M, Tong X. “Development and validation of a predictive model for colorectal polyps in patients with NAFLD based on risk factors identified from a meta-analysis.” Frontiers in medicine (2026). PMID: 42553569 ↗
L2aCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[272]
Mizuno H, Nakatani E, Oze I et al.. “High incidence of colorectal cancer in Japanese individuals with hypertension.” Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension (2026). PMID: 42521804 ↗
L2bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[273]
Ding Y, Lin X. “Age Inflection Points of Colorectal Adenoma Risk in Young Adults: A Joinpoint Regression Analysis of a Single-Center Retrospective Colonoscopy-Based Cohort.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 42513546 ↗
L2bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[274]
Huntley C, Loong L, Mallinson C et al.. “Impact of surveillance colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in Lynch syndrome: a national observational cohort study of patients in the English NHS 2010-2022.” Gut (2026). PMID: 42562418 ↗
L2bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[275]
O'Sullivan DE, Hilsden RJ, Harsanyi H et al.. “Risk of Developing Subsequent Primary Colorectal Cancers Among Non-Colorectal Cancer Survivors: Implications for Prevention and Screening.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 42572253 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[276]
Muhonen E, Seppä K, Ryynänen H et al.. “Incidence Trends of Colorectal Cancer by Social and Behavioral Factors-A Pooled Cohort Study.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 42552866 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[277]
Tang D, Mao Z, Lan S et al.. “Deficient Mismatch Repair Represents a Distinct Molecular Feature of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer in Chinese Single-Center Cohort.” International journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 42538607 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[278]
Liu YS, Chang PK. “Comparison of outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in patients with heart failure: a national readmission database analysis.” Surgical endoscopy (2026). PMID: 42536088 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[279]
Luo Z, Safizadeh F, Mandic M et al.. “Age- and sex-dependent associations of metabolic syndrome with colorectal cancer in the UK Biobank.” British journal of cancer (2026). PMID: 42533014 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[280]
Li X, Ji F, Cao Y et al.. “Colorectal cancer screening awareness among rural populations in Northern China.” BMC public health (2026). PMID: 42522007 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[281]
Chang WY, Wang J, Lin HH et al.. “Metabolic Optimization and Risk of Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients With MASLD.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 42518234 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[282]
Yu J, Zhang J, Su Y. “Real-world propensity score-matched analysis of integrative medicine formula for chemotherapy-related gastrointestinal adverse events in colorectal cancer.” Explore (New York, N.Y.) (2026). PMID: 42520443 ↗
L2bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[283]
Severino A, Rondinella D, Varca S et al.. “Feasibility and Compliance of Stool Collection for Future Microbiome-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening: Preliminary Findings from a Prospective Multicenter FIT-Positive Cohort.” Microorganisms (2026). PMID: 42514069 ↗
L4Cited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[284]
Alatise OI, Peeri NC, Abdulkareem FB et al.. “Colorectal Cancer Risk Factors in Adults in Nigeria.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 42545699 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[285]
Andreu-Ballester JC, Amorós-García C, Benlloch-Pérez S et al.. “Downregulation of CD132 in Colonic Adenomas and Cancer Is Associated with γδ T-Cell Loss, Increased Apoptosis, and Microsporidia Infection.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 42512338 ↗
L3bCited in: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
[286]
Hüneburg R, van Bokhorst QNE, Pellisé M et al.. “Artificial intelligence-assisted detection and optical differentiation of colorectal lesions in Lynch syndrome surveillance (CADLY2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled superiority trial.” The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 42462747 ↗
L1bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[287]
Burn J, Borthwick GM, Elliott F et al.. “Aspirin for cancer prevention in individuals with Lynch syndrome: first results from the CaPP3 multicentre, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.” The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 42425127 ↗
L1bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[288]
Poo SXW, Dai N, Cross AJ et al.. “Detection of adenoma, serrated lesion, and colorectal cancer in Lynch syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Endoscopy (2026). PMID: 42442403 ↗
L2aCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[289]
Yoshioka T, Yamamoto Y, Tsukada Y et al.. “Clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of universal tumor screening to identify Lynch syndrome in patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer: a prospective observational study in Japan.” International journal of clinical oncology (2026). PMID: 42552405 ↗
L4Cited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[290]
Zhen J, Dong M, Li Y et al.. “Human salivary microbiome as a potential non-invasive biomarker for early-onset colorectal cancer screening: a prospective study.” BMC microbiology (2026). PMID: 42469627 ↗
L2bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[291]
Chejara P, Eriksson A. “Gut microbiome biomarkers for colorectal cancer detection: a systematic review highlighting age as a key confounder.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 42518809 ↗
L2aCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[292]
Wang Y, Jin S, Xu L et al.. “The Relation Between Antibiotic Use and Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Journal of biochemical and molecular toxicology (2026). PMID: 42402956 ↗
L2aCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[293]
Serna G, Obón-Santacana M, Baraibar I et al.. “Intratumoral Fusobacterium species and survival in resectable colorectal cancer: a multicenter cohort study.” ESMO open (2026). PMID: 42526180 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[294]
Ahmet RAM, Nascu AG, Camen GC et al.. “Fusobacterium in the Gut-Breast Axis: Interpreting Systemic Dysbiosis in a Romanian Breast Cancer Cohort.” Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) (2026). PMID: 42512808 ↗
L2bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[295]
Wang X, Wang J, Chen W et al.. “Metagenome analysis reveals multi-kingdom gut microbiota as diagnostic markers for colorectal cancer.” Frontiers in microbiology (2026). PMID: 42519695 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[296]
Nardelli C, Nunziato M, Di Maggio F et al.. “CCL2: A Pro-Inflammatory Driver and Candidate Diagnostic Biomarker in Colorectal Cancer Patients.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 42511815 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[297]
Zhili G, Jie L, Yuyue X et al.. “Fecal metagenomic profiling in patients with colorectal adenomas to characterize gut microbial composition and functional potential.” Frontiers in microbiology (2026). PMID: 42487710 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[298]
Jiang Z, Li L, Long Q et al.. “Cross-sectional gut microbiota and serum metabolite differences across clinically defined groups in colorectal cancer.” Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology (2026). PMID: 42499546 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[299]
García G, Díaz A, Fernández LT et al.. “Del immune V and microbiome restructuring in colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized double blind placebo controlled trial.” Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology (2026). PMID: 42482993 ↗
L4Cited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[300]
Druzhinin VG, Baranova ED, Demenkov PS et al.. “Features of the Intestinal and Respiratory Microbiome in Colorectal Cancer Patients in Western Siberia.” Microorganisms (2026). PMID: 42513897 ↗
L3bCited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[301]
Sankaran H, Kotliarov Y, Zhao Y et al.. “Associations of Age With Tumor Genomic Characteristics in Relapsed/Refractory Cancers Interrogated With the NCI-MATCH Trial Targeted Gene Panel Assay.” JCO precision oncology (2026). PMID: 42566732 ↗
L5Cited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[302]
Tang SS, Bi Y, Chan DKH. “Genomic, transcriptomic, and molecular predictors of response to neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a narrative review.” Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) (2026). PMID: 42565918 ↗
L5Cited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[303]
Wespiser M, Rochefort P, Gauduchon T et al.. “Pharmacological prevention of second primary cancers: From chemoprevention to precision cancer interception.” Cancer treatment reviews (2026). PMID: 42556070 ↗
L5Cited in: Etiology and Triggering Factors
[304]
Seraphine C, Macleod A, Thornsberry T et al.. “Macrophage Polarization as a Target for Colorectal Cancer Treatment Optimization: A Systematic Review.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 42449595 ↗
L1aCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[305]
Rocha Lima CMSP, Yothers G, George TJ et al.. “COMMIT: A Randomized Study of mFOLFOX6/Bevacizumab/Atezolizumab or Atezolizumab Alone as First-Line Treatment of Deficient DNA Mismatch Repair Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2026). PMID: 42525921 ↗
L1bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[306]
Hu H, Shen X, Li Y et al.. “Neoadjuvant toripalimab plus celecoxib versus toripalimab monotherapy for mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high, locally advanced colorectal cancer (PICC-2): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2026). PMID: 42385761 ↗
L2bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[307]
Kyrochristou I, Kyrochristou G, Anagnostopoulos G et al.. “Genomic and molecular landscape of early onset colorectal cancer: Emerging insights and clinical implications-A systematic review.” Surgery (2026). PMID: 42492394 ↗
L2aCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[308]
Balaha M, Aldosari SA, Alamer AA et al.. “Tissue-Agnostic Targeting in Solid Tumors: A PRISMA-Compliant Meta-Analysis of Efficacy, Safety, and Resistance Determinants Across Histologies.” Oncology research (2026). PMID: 42358834 ↗
L4Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[309]
Reyes-de-la-Mata Y, Fenix-Caballero S, Salmeron-Navas FJ. “Systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic colorectal cancer.” Farmacia hospitalaria : organo oficial de expresion cientifica de la Sociedad Espanola de Farmacia Hospitalaria (2026). PMID: 42481259 ↗
L1aCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[310]
Hasegawa H, Inamoto R, Sugiyama K et al.. “Trifluridine/tipiracil with or without bevacizumab in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective observational study.” Therapeutic advances in medical oncology (2026). PMID: 42571189 ↗
L3bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[311]
Bichalski BW, Bichalska-Lach M, Nycz M et al.. “Searching for Novel Molecular Prognostic Markers in Colorectal Cancer-The Tumor Suppressor Proteins p53 and PTEN.” Biomedicines (2026). PMID: 42511928 ↗
L3bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[312]
Morimoto Y, Uemura M, Kagawa Y et al.. “Prevalence of MSI-H/dMMR Colorectal Cancer in Japan: Data From the Clinical Study Group of the University of Osaka-Colorectal Registry.” Annals of gastroenterological surgery (2026). PMID: 42495674 ↗
L3bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[313]
LaPelusa M, Shah P, Bhamidipati D et al.. “Patterns of progression and survival in patients with mismatch repair deficient/ microsatellite instability- high metastatic colorectal cancer treated with immunotherapy.” The oncologist (2026). PMID: 42475509 ↗
L3bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[314]
Lu Y, Wang H, Chen G. “Independent and sex-stratified association between microsatellite instability and peripheral hemoglobin in colorectal cancer.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 42528664 ↗
L2bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[315]
Moris D, Nguyen B, Kroemer A et al.. “Integrative Genomic and Clinical Profiling of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases to Guide Personalized Surgery and Liver Transplantation.” Cancer genomics & proteomics (2026). PMID: 42373221 ↗
L2bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[316]
Ben Kridis W, Khanfir A. “First-Line Immunotherapy Versus Chemotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Phase III Studies.” Journal of gastrointestinal cancer (2026). PMID: 42474934 ↗
L2aCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[317]
Jie Y, Lu Z, Wang X et al.. “xinguangA preliminary characterization of PI4K/PIPK alterations across solid tumors: an exploratory framework for prognostic and therapeutic stratification.” Cancer biology & therapy (2026). PMID: 42445966 ↗
L4Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[318]
Lv K, Yang H, Xi X et al.. “Clinicopathological and molecular profiling of sporadic synchronous multiple primary colorectal cancers: focus on microsatellite instability status.” Journal of gastrointestinal oncology (2026). PMID: 42434246 ↗
L3bCited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[319]
Li X, Yasin F, Pavlick DC et al.. “Genomic Landscape and Therapeutic Implications of ALK Fusion-Positive Colorectal Cancer.” The oncologist (2026). PMID: 42565556 ↗
L5Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[320]
Shan Y, Zhang X, Liu J et al.. “Targeting molecular residual disease and immune escape in colorectal cancer recurrence: biomarker-guided immunotherapy and cell therapies.” Frontiers in medicine (2026). PMID: 42558893 ↗
L5Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[321]
Glazunova E, Kurnosov A, Bogacheva A et al.. “Virulome over taxonomy: refining the driver-passenger model in colorectal carcinogenesis.” Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology (2026). PMID: 42523711 ↗
L5Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[322]
Fu Y, Wang Y, Wu S et al.. “Cell cycle dysregulation: a central hub in colitis-associated colorectal carcinogenesis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42519326 ↗
L5Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[323]
Vu JK, Younan E, Karunaratne S et al.. “Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer in the Molecular Era: A Scoping Review of Biomarkers of Oncologic Outcome following Salvage Surgery.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42518147 ↗
L5Cited in: Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology
[324]
Brown KGM, Stevenson ARL, Solomon MJ et al.. “Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: individual patient data meta-analysis of the ALaCaRT and Z6051 randomized trials.” BJS open (2026). PMID: 42565372 ↗
L1aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[325]
Tappenden P, Harnan S, Ren S et al.. “PillCam COLON 2 for investigation of the colon through direct visualisation: systematic review and economic evaluation.” Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) (2026). PMID: 42517739 ↗
L1aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[326]
Afshari K, Onerup A, Li Y et al.. “Effects of Prehabilitation by Physical Activity on Fatigue After Surgery for Colorectal Cancer. Results From Secondary Analyses in the Randomized Controlled Trial PHYSSURG-C.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 42568293 ↗
L1bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[327]
Lu J, Chong YY. “Effects of a Psycho-Behavioural Intervention on Cancer-Related Fatigue Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.” Psycho-oncology (2026). PMID: 42568201 ↗
L4Cited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[328]
Serra-Aracil X, Gonzalez A, Bargalló J et al.. “Quality of life, bowel dysfunction, and long-term oncological outcomes after transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid- and low- rectal cancer (Ta-LaTME study): multicentre randomized open-label trial.” BJS open (2026). PMID: 42551037 ↗
L1bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[329]
Mo S, Zhou C, Ma M et al.. “Dynamic Circulating Tumor DNA Methylation Monitoring Guiding Postoperative Surveillance in Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Phase III FIND Trial.” Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2026). PMID: 42525894 ↗
L1bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[330]
Keppel GA, Ike B, Andrilla CHA et al.. “Recruiting Rural Patients for Clinical Research: Lessons From a Colorectal Cancer Screening Trial.” The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association (2026). PMID: 42517457 ↗
L1bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[331]
Sadien ID, Cooper G, Phillips V et al.. “Influence of KRAS mutation subtypes on response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: meta-analysis.” BJS open (2026). PMID: 42551038 ↗
L2aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[332]
Zhang N, He Y, Qin Z et al.. “Prognostic significance of tumoral Siglec-15 expression in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42553325 ↗
L2aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[333]
Chen W, Li S, Wu Z et al.. “Diagnostic accuracy of computer-aided detection for colorectal polyps of any size, ≤ 5 mm, and 6-9 mm: a meta-analysis.” World journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42533341 ↗
L2aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[334]
Guo C, Liu S, Li L et al.. “A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis and Review of Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Colorectal Cancer: Examining Radiation Dosage, Long-Term Prognosis, and Treatment-Related Complications.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 42522172 ↗
L2aCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[335]
Kenzie ES, Herreid-O'Neill A, Myers E et al.. “Facilitation of Health Plan-Clinic Partnerships to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening for Rural Medicaid Enrollees: A Qualitative Study.” The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association (2026). PMID: 42572815 ↗
L2bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[336]
Cwaliński T, Bigus Z, Lesiak P et al.. “Understanding Textbook outcome failure after robotic colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter domain-specific analysis.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42570129 ↗
L3bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[337]
Gao L, Liu Y, Lv X et al.. “HDL-C presents a suggestive negative moderating trend for the association between total cholesterol and colorectal polyps: model construction and bootstrap internal assessment of a predictive nomogram.” Frontiers in endocrinology (2026). PMID: 42558406 ↗
L3bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[338]
Bujanda L, Val B, Portillo Villares I et al.. “Colorectal Cancer Mortality Following an Organized Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Screening Program.” JAMA network open (2026). PMID: 42555038 ↗
L3bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[339]
Xin X, Qiu H, Zang Y et al.. “Association of intratumoral CD68+CD163+ M2-like macrophages with survival in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42539549 ↗
L3bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[340]
Lei XH, Li R, Wang DM et al.. “Tertiary Lymphoid Structures as Predictors of Recurrence in Colorectal Cancer: Development and Validation of a Machine Learning-Based Scoring Model.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 42538596 ↗
L3bCited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[341]
Takaoka A, Irie N, Sugino A et al.. “Treatment outcomes of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery with multivisceral resection of adjacent organs.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42530722 ↗
L4Cited in: Diagnosis and Workup
[342]
Peery AF, Strate LL, Stollman N et al.. “ACG Clinical Guideline: Colonic Diverticulitis.” The American journal of gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 42390126 ↗
L1cCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[343]
Schultz JK, Sigurdardottir JM, Backstad LT et al.. “Accuracy and reliability of preoperative CT in perforated diverticulitis: Post hoc secondary analysis from the SCANDIV trial.” Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society (2026). PMID: 41692579 ↗
L1bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[344]
Curia S, Taoum C, Piozzi GN et al.. “Robotic surgery in colorectal emergencies: a systematic review of current evidence.” World journal of emergency surgery : WJES (2026). PMID: 42104446 ↗
L4Cited in: Differential Diagnosis
[345]
Gao L, Guo Z, Wang Z et al.. “An algorithm-enhanced stool DNA system improves the differential diagnosis of colorectal cancer versus Crohn's disease in high-risk symptomatic patients.” Computer methods and programs in biomedicine (2026). PMID: 41950614 ↗
L2bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[346]
Stirrat T, Bejugam D, Alukal J et al.. “Colitis cystica profunda: a systematic review.” European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 41604561 ↗
L2aCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[347]
Kraft M, Maroli A, Pera M et al.. “Subclinical anxiety and depression and postoperative complications after major colorectal surgery: A 2-center study.” Surgery (2026). PMID: 42224963 ↗
L4Cited in: Differential Diagnosis
[348]
Ma R, Nasseri Y, Wu G et al.. “The importance of procedural indication in predicting operative time for elective robotic colon surgery.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 41866630 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[349]
Tang L, Liu G, Lv X et al.. “Quantitative parameters of dual-layer spectral CT for differentiating metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in colorectal cancer.” Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society (2026). PMID: 41865009 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[350]
Wael Mahmood M, Abraham-Nordling M, Löf-Granström A et al.. “Enhanced recovery after surgery in diverticular disease: A multicenter comparison with colorectal cancer.” Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society (2026). PMID: 41853898 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[351]
Booth AL, Torlakovic EE, Chetty R et al.. “Despite simplified diagnostic criteria, intraobserver and interobserver variability remain in the interpretation of colorectal serrated polyps.” Histopathology (2026). PMID: 41622126 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[352]
Zhao Q, Shi D, Zhong H et al.. “The predictive value of MR cytometry in histological differentiation of rectal cancer: an exploratory study.” European radiology (2026). PMID: 41617831 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[353]
Mejza M, Bajer A, Biskup L et al.. “Preferences, Expectations and Management Satisfaction in IBD Patients: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Study.” Journal of clinical medicine (2026). PMID: 42122997 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[354]
Abu Sneineh A, Haj Ali S, Quteishat B et al.. “Diagnostic yield of endoscopy in women under 50 with iron deficiency anemia: a retrospective cohort study from Jordan.” Frontiers in global women's health (2026). PMID: 42523980 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[355]
Usman M, Correa E, Chung WY et al.. “Development and internal validation of a nomogram to predict colorectal cancer risk in patients with diverticulitis.” International journal of colorectal disease (2026). PMID: 42337066 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[356]
Usman M, Correa E, Chung W et al.. “Rethinking the role of endoscopy for colorectal cancer following diverticulitis: An exploratory model for guiding endoscopic assessment.” The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland (2026). PMID: 41633884 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[357]
Wu S, Wang Z, Qiu C et al.. “Nomogram based on MRI images and clinical data for differentiating mucinous from non-mucinous rectal adenocarcinoma.” BMC medical imaging (2025). PMID: 41449349 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[358]
Tehrani FR, Asgari N, Jamalli A et al.. “Exploring the link between Mycobacterium avium subsp. Paratuberculosis and colorectal cancer development.” BMC gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 41580611 ↗
L3bCited in: Differential Diagnosis
[359]
Saleh M, Akil A, Chehade L et al.. “Tumor Characteristics and Survival Predictors in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Lebanese Single-Center Experience.” Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology (2026). PMID: 42471825 ↗
L4Cited in: Differential Diagnosis
[360]
Kitaguchi D, Forgione A, Serra-Aracil X et al.. “Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing multiple anastomotic techniques after total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer.” European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology (2026). PMID: 42330709 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[361]
Gosavi R, Smith B, Mealy A et al.. “Resection quality and oncologic outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42223567 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[362]
Keating T, Drumm C, Kennedy N et al.. “Systemic inflammatory response after robotic versus laparoscopic abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with colorectal cancer subgroup analysis.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42223505 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[363]
Morarasu S, Lunca S, Clancy C et al.. “Robotic versus laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer: meta-analysis of pathological quality indicators.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 42213239 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[364]
Sun Y, Xu Z, Wang X et al.. “Comparative Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Early-Onset Low Rectal Cancer: 3-Year Results From the LASRE Trial.” World journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 42272043 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[365]
Moolenaar LR, Ali M, Aufenacker TJ et al.. “Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus completion total mesorectal excision after local excision for early rectal cancer (TESAR): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.” The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 42202843 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[366]
Mason JD, Khan JS, Ahmed S et al.. “ACPGBI position statement on the role of standard high-quality right hemicolectomy and complete mesocolic excision in right-sided colon cancer.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 42175521 ↗
L1cCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[367]
Wu F, Hu X, Li B et al.. “Short-Course Radiotherapy-Based Total Neoadjuvant Therapy plus Tislelizumab for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (Neo-STAR): Early Outcomes of a Randomized Phase II Trial.” Cancer communications (London, England) (2026). PMID: 42495710 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[368]
Arun Kumar G, Sharma G, Arun Kumar B. “The Multi-Dimensional Learning Curve in Robotic-Assisted vs. Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review of Procedural Efficiency, Pathological Integrity, and Ergonomic Impact.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42474778 ↗
L2aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[369]
Mao H, Ma S, Li Y et al.. “Interpretable machine learning model for predicting operative difficulty in robotic total mesorectal excision for mid-low rectal cancer.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42223752 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[370]
Zhang Y, Lin Q, Cai H et al.. “Anatomic distribution of postoperative recurrence and radiotherapy target volume optimization in rectal cancer: A large-scale real-world study.” Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (2026). PMID: 42177995 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[371]
Yu JG, Wang SY, Zhang TH et al.. “Reduced-port robot radical colorectal cancer surgery a prospective trial and standardized port strategy.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42474928 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[372]
K AJ, Sharma S. “Rare colorectal manifestations of pediatric gastrointestinal lymphoma: a systematic review of clinical spectrum and surgical implications.” Pediatric surgery international (2026). PMID: 42437396 ↗
L2aCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[373]
Wong TN, Kong CY, Ishak P et al.. “Peri-Operative Systemic Inflammatory Responses Predict Post-Operative Complications in Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenterative Surgery for Primary Locally Advanced Sigmoid and Rectal Cancer.” Journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42437514 ↗
L3bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[374]
Parmar KL, Ul-Haq E, Martin E et al.. “Transition to total robotic colorectal practice: feasibility and outcomes in a UK colorectal unit.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42303930 ↗
L4Cited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[375]
Sato Y, Miyo M, Ishii M et al.. “Real-time indocyanine green fluorescence imaging enhances the precision of lymph node dissection in laparoscopic colon cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched cohort study.” Surgical endoscopy (2026). PMID: 42301453 ↗
L3bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[376]
Lal T, Liu F, Cabulong A et al.. “Age-stratified risk profiles for emergency colorectal cancer resection: A machine-learning analysis.” Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (2026). PMID: 42263377 ↗
L3bCited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[377]
Lococo J, Rodríguez C, Pedro L et al.. “Analysis and development of the learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery at a specialized center.” Journal of robotic surgery (2026). PMID: 42260235 ↗
L4Cited in: Management: Surgical and Local Therapies
[378]
Nie G, Li X, Wang Y et al.. “Integrated Evaluation of Survival, Surgical Conversion, and Toxicity for Induction Therapy in Initially Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: An Individual Patient Data Network Meta-analysis.” Annals of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42463606 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[379]
Sebag-Montefiore D, Adams R, Gollins S et al.. “Addition of irinotecan to chemoradiotherapy as preoperative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (ARISTOTLE): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.” The Lancet. Oncology (2026). PMID: 42508427 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[380]
Sun X, Fang Y, Yang X et al.. “Neuroprotection and prevention of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy with Huangqi Guizhi Wuwu Decoction: a 12-center randomized, double-blind trial with mechanistic validation.” Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology (2026). PMID: 42435525 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[381]
Yan M, Bai R, Yan W. “The role of targeted therapy in the management of colorectal cancer liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Translational cancer research (2026). PMID: 42445395 ↗
L1aCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[382]
Du H, Zhou C, Zhang X. “Prognostic Factors and Radiotherapy Benefit in pT3N0M0 Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.” Technology in cancer research & treatment (2026). PMID: 42507765 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[383]
Rustemov S, Kuandyk A, Bertleuova A et al.. “Resistance of Colorectal Cancer Stem Cells to Modern Therapies: A Systematic Review.” International journal of molecular sciences (2026). PMID: 42511628 ↗
L2aCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[384]
Liu X, Su S, Shi X et al.. “HER2 overexpression/amplification in colorectal cancer: spatial intratumoral heterogeneity as a key determinant of detection discordance and therapy response.” Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology (2026). PMID: 42507169 ↗
L4Cited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[385]
Rémond M, Aparicio T, Martinez-Tapia C et al.. “Predicting severe toxicities and mortality in older patients with colorectal cancer: An analysis of 3 clinical trials and 3 prospective cohorts.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 42456539 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[386]
Zhang Z, Xi Q, Zhuang Q et al.. “Impact of oral nutritional supplements on chemotherapy tolerance and overall survival in postoperative colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.” Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition (2026). PMID: 42521230 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[387]
Taheri Z, Emadi E, Esfandiary Rad AM et al.. “Prioritizing Chemotherapy in Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Improves pCR Rate in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer in Countries with Limited Radiotherapy Access: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” Journal of gastrointestinal cancer (2026). PMID: 42501213 ↗
L1bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[388]
Belfort GR, Pompeu BF, Velucci MP et al.. “Salvage abdominoperineal resection for anal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 42439211 ↗
L4Cited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[389]
Lunca S, Ong WL, Morarasu S et al.. “Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Long-Course Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Real-World Tumor Response and Clinical Outcomes.” Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) (2026). PMID: 42506362 ↗
L3bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[390]
Guo Z, Guo C, Lu Z et al.. “Macroscopic fractal dynamics characterize the "physical-metabolic" dual barriers and systemic immune exhaustion associated with primary resistance to immunotherapy in liver metastases.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42495635 ↗
L3bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[391]
Herr FL, Stock JK, Solms-Baruth VGZ et al.. “CEUS with VEGFR2-targeted microbubbles for monitoring of early immunotherapy effects in a colorectal cancer model.” Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society (2026). PMID: 42538573 ↗
L4Cited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[392]
Guardascione M, Rizzetto M, Foltran L et al.. “Prolonged response to combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in BRAF mutant colorectal cancer, a case report.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 42534285 ↗
L2bCited in: Management: Systemic and Radiation Therapy
[393]
Finch DA, Chaudhury MP, Morris R et al.. “Outcomes reported in studies of anal high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions treatments: systematic review.” BJS open (2026). PMID: 42400410 ↗
L1aCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[394]
de Oliveira Campos E Silva V, Reeves J, Ferreira GD et al.. “A multidisciplinary virtual (p)rehabilitation model of care for colorectal cancer surgery.” World journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42432694 ↗
L1bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[395]
van Driel MHE, Swartjes H, Lemmens JMG et al.. “Patient-led, home-based follow-up for colorectal cancer: DISTANCE multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial.” The British journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 42359543 ↗
L1bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[396]
Song MY, Li M, Tu L et al.. “Effects of digital health interventions on anxiety, depression, and quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Frontiers in oncology (2026). PMID: 42311272 ↗
L1aCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[397]
Trevisol E, Fabbri N, Pesce A et al.. “Trimodal prehabilitation and psychological outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: preliminary findings from a single-center randomized trial.” Frontiers in surgery (2026). PMID: 42499628 ↗
L4Cited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[398]
Hanlon E, Hayden L, Karl J et al.. “Body Image Following Ostomy Surgery for Cancer: A Systematic Review.” Psycho-oncology (2026). PMID: 42400471 ↗
L2aCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[399]
Molla MD, Symonds EL, Winter JM et al.. “Multicomponent Lifestyle Interventions During Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: A Systematic Review.” Cancers (2026). PMID: 42352441 ↗
L2aCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[400]
Pérez-Manchón D, Lozano-Hernández CM, Mata-González G et al.. “Impact of nursing shift patterns on work-related gastrointestinal disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Frontiers in public health (2026). PMID: 42326947 ↗
L2aCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[401]
Loroña NC, Liu L, Kazemian E et al.. “Longitudinal Associations Between Inflammatory Biomarkers and Fatigue in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Study.” Cancer medicine (2026). PMID: 42498976 ↗
L2bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[402]
He C, Xu W, Li J et al.. “Validation and cutpoints of the treatment-induced neuropathy assessment scale (TNAS) in Chinese cancer patients: a prospective cohort study.” Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation (2026). PMID: 42493739 ↗
L2bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[403]
Lindsköld M, Gerdin A, Park J et al.. “Minimal long-term impact of anastomotic leakage on quality of life after anterior resection for rectal cancer: A population-based cohort study.” Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society (2026). PMID: 42473772 ↗
L2bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[404]
Lunenberg RA, van Erning FN, Sijtsma FPC et al.. “Patient-reported quality of life after chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma: A cross-sectional cohort study.” Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (2026). PMID: 42324023 ↗
L2bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[405]
Choubey AP, Leal J, White C et al.. “Beyond Survival: Prospective Longitudinal Insights into Health-related Quality of Life After Hepatectomy for High-risk Colorectal Liver Metastases.” Annals of surgery (2026). PMID: 42572133 ↗
L3bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[406]
Huang SH, Chiang SF, Tsai KY et al.. “A quasi-bridge to surgery approach for stage IV obstructive colon cancer: extending the bridge-to-surgery concept to metastatic disease.” World journal of surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42426861 ↗
L4Cited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[407]
Nåhls NS, Rautakorpi L, Nuutinen M et al.. “Association Between Timing of Specialist Palliative Care and End-Of-Life Healthcare Utilization in Patients With Colorectal Cancer and Related Intestinal Cancers: A Nationwide Register-Based Study.” Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center (2026). PMID: 42569855 ↗
L2bCited in: Supportive Care and Complication Management
[408]
Tashiro K, Osumi H, Kataoka K et al.. “Time-dependent recurrence patterns after curative resection for stage II/III colorectal cancer: An integrated analysis of four phase III randomized controlled trials (JCOG2310A-S4).” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 42520593 ↗
L1bCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[409]
Zeng H, Lan K, Wang X et al.. “Endoscopic obstruction and site-specific metastatic patterns after curative resection of non-metastatic colorectal cancer: A two-center retrospective cohort study.” Surgical oncology (2026). PMID: 42531781 ↗
L2bCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[410]
Kawata A, Miyamoto Y, Nakamura H et al.. “Age-Dependent Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Transthyretin After Curative Resection for Stage I-III Colorectal Cancer.” Annals of gastroenterological surgery (2026). PMID: 42540025 ↗
L3bCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[411]
Ku GY, Ryoo SB, Kim MJ et al.. “Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in patients with liver cirrhosis: a comparative study on risk of open conversion.” American journal of surgery (2026). PMID: 42537286 ↗
L4Cited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[412]
Guccione L, Wong C, Yeung JM et al.. “Aligning with optimal care pathways for people with colon cancer: Clinical, survival and cost implications across socioeconomic and geographic populations in Australia.” Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (2026). PMID: 42531715 ↗
L3bCited in: Prognosis and Long-term Outcomes
[413]
Chen B, Liu J, Gan K et al.. “A network meta-analysis of endocrine adverse events induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors in colorectal cancer.” Frontiers in immunology (2026). PMID: 42500681 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[414]
Fadeli L, Desouky M, Alfarone L et al.. “Traction-assisted versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 42230412 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[415]
Do PNV, Nguyen TK, Qi Y et al.. “Effectiveness of survivorship programmes to enhance health-related quality of life of colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 42149231 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[416]
Bananzadeh A, Bahadori M, Tadayon SMK et al.. “The role of artificial intelligence in adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials-Artificial intelligence and adenoma detection.” Techniques in coloproctology (2026). PMID: 42135566 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[417]
Li L, Meng X, Wu Q et al.. “Comparative efficacy of neoadjuvant short-course versus long-course radiotherapy-based regimens with or without immunotherapy for locally advanced pMMR rectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.” BMC medicine (2026). PMID: 41826948 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[418]
Alfarone L, Spadaccini M, Rizkala T et al.. “Prophylactic clipping after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Endoscopy (2026). PMID: 41760121 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[419]
Iguchi K, Yamazaki K, Misumi T et al.. “Mapping the anatomical landscape of colorectal tumours: Location-specific efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies: Pooled analysis of randomised trials.” European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) (2026). PMID: 42372637 ↗
L1bCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[420]
Backenroth D, Roels S, Dibaj S et al.. “Practical considerations when using the covariate-adjusted log-rank test for the analysis of time-to-event endpoints in oncology trials.” Biometrics (2026). PMID: 42308366 ↗
L1bCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[421]
Kitaguchi D, Forgione A, Innocenzi C et al.. “Decompression stent, stoma, transanal tube or immediate surgery: Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 42244048 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[422]
Lal N, Cheong Chung KJN, Hodges N et al.. “MRI prognostic features in rectal cancer neoadjuvant trials: A systematic review of reporting gaps across two decades.” Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (2026). PMID: 42170773 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[423]
Wang S, Gu R, Lu J et al.. “Efficacy and risk analysis of monotherapy and dual immunotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.” BMC cancer (2026). PMID: 42168914 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[424]
Rafi R, Yasmin N, Ghani M et al.. “Performance of artificial intelligence software: EndoAngel, EndoAID, CAD-EYE, GI Genius, and EndoScreener in adenoma detection: an extended network meta-analysis.” European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology (2026). PMID: 42066011 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[425]
Zhang Z, Luo T, Tang H. “Prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with high-risk colorectal cancer with abdominal metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” BMC gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 42032590 ↗
L1aCited in: Landmark Trials and Key Evidence
[426]
Tun SNL, Singweratham N, Siewchaisakul P et al.. “The efficacy of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Preventive medicine reports (2026). PMID: 42472250 ↗
L1aCited in: Prevention and Screening
[427]
Thygesen MK, Wehberg S, Dieperink KB et al.. “Improving self-efficacy through nurse navigation in patients during treatment for colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled trial.” Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (2026). PMID: 42557451 ↗
L1bCited in: Prevention and Screening
[428]
Schwartz PH, Imperiale TF, Perkins SM et al.. “Effect of Personalized Risk Messages on Patient Intent and Decision Making in Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making (2026). PMID: 42517432 ↗
L1bCited in: Prevention and Screening
[429]
Kaneko M, Sakuraba A. “Colorectal cancer screening uptake and lesion detection in people living with HIV: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” HIV medicine (2026). PMID: 42495884 ↗
L2aCited in: Prevention and Screening
[430]
Li Y, Li S, Wang H et al.. “Prospective evaluation of a multi-gene cfDNA methylation assay for CRC screening in a high-risk cohort.” Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine (2026). PMID: 42517221 ↗
L2bCited in: Prevention and Screening
[431]
Chao YJ, Hsieh YH, Tang CP et al.. “Real-world evidence of water exchange colonoscopy improving adenoma detection rates: A propensity score-matched analysis.” Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology (2026). PMID: 42523998 ↗
L3bCited in: Prevention and Screening
[432]
Kim SY, Lee SW, Kim SY et al.. “Association between colonoscopy and colorectal cancer risk in adults aged 75 to 85 years: a nationwide population-based cohort study.” Gastrointestinal endoscopy (2026). PMID: 42497981 ↗
L4Cited in: Prevention and Screening
[433]
Jung KU, Lee SR, Park J et al.. “Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT as a surgical triage tool for synchronous neoplasm detection in acute left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a two-institution retrospective cohort study.” Frontiers in surgery (2026). PMID: 42548845 ↗
L4Cited in: Prevention and Screening
[434]
Wolf AMD, Hoffman RM, Walter LC et al.. “Colorectal cancer screening: An update to the American Cancer Society guideline, 2026.” CA: a cancer journal for clinicians (2026). PMID: 42200680 ↗
L1cCited in: Guidelines and Resources
[435]
Godfrey EL, Mahoney F, Bansal VV et al.. “Consensus Guideline for the Management of Patients with Appendiceal Tumors, Part 2: Appendiceal Tumors with Peritoneal Involvement.” Annals of surgical oncology (2025). PMID: 40560501 ↗
L1cCited in: Guidelines and Resources
[436]
Horvat N, Liu PS, Fowler KJ et al.. “ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Staging and Follow-up of Anal Cancer.” Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR (2025). PMID: 40409890 ↗
L1cCited in: Guidelines and Resources
[437]
Kuznetsova O, Battaiotto E, Malvezzi G et al.. “Anti-EGFR rechallenge compared with standard of care for patients with ctDNA RAS/BRAF wild-type chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Critical reviews in oncology/hematology (2026). PMID: 41651313 ↗
L1aCited in: Guidelines and Resources
[438]
Li Y, Han C, Tang J. “Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy combined with immunotherapy in MMR‑proficient/microsatellite stable non‑metastatic rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.” Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology (2025). PMID: 41396282 ↗
L1aCited in: Guidelines and Resources
[439]
Liu L, Yao G, Yang J et al.. “Optimal choice of different neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapies for locally advanced rectal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.” Cancer metastasis reviews (2025). PMID: 40699387 ↗
L1aCited in: Guidelines and Resources