Skip to content

Colorectal adenocarcinoma — overview

TL;DR — Colorectal adenocarcinoma is not one disease but a family of gland-forming cancers arising through conventional adenoma, serrated, inflammatory and inherited pathways. GLOBOCAN estimated that colorectal cancer accounted for 9.6% of new cancers and 9.3% of cancer deaths worldwide in 2022 (Bray 2024, PMID 38572751). Screening can prevent cancer by removing precursors or detect it earlier, but outcomes depend on test quality, repeated participation and diagnostic follow-through (Bretthauer 2022, PMID 36214590; Doubeni 2024, PMID 39028667). Surgery anchors localized treatment; oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy, total neoadjuvant rectal strategies and metastasis-directed treatment are selected by stage, anatomy and recurrence risk (André 2015, PMID 26527776; Bahadoer 2021, PMID 33301740). In advanced disease, MMR/MSI, extended RAS, BRAF V600E, HER2 and rare fusions now define materially different treatment paths (André 2020, PMID 33264544; Tabernero 2021, PMID 33503393; Strickler 2023, PMID 37142372).

Scope and terminology

Colorectal cancer includes malignant tumors of the colon and rectum; adenocarcinoma is the dominant epithelial histology. Colon and rectal adenocarcinomas share much of their molecular biology, yet rectal anatomy makes pelvic MRI, circumferential-margin risk, radiotherapy and organ preservation central in a way they are not for most colon tumors (MERCURY Study Group 2006, PMID 16984925).

This knowledge base treats colon and rectal cancer together where evidence is shared and separately where anatomy changes decisions. It does not equate evidence from appendiceal, anal, small-bowel or neuroendocrine malignancies with colorectal adenocarcinoma.

The condition at a glance

Dimension Quantitative or decision anchor Evidence boundary
Global burden Colorectum represented 9.6% of incident cancers and 9.3% of cancer deaths in GLOBOCAN 2022 Modelled estimates, not a single registry (Bray 2024, PMID 38572751)
2020 burden 1.9 million cases and 930,000 deaths; projection 3.2 million and 1.6 million by 2040 Projection assumes demographic change, not future prevention gains (Morgan 2023, PMID 36604116)
Principal precursors Conventional adenomas and serrated lesions Pathways overlap; morphology is not a perfect molecular surrogate (Sullivan 2022, PMID 35361330)
Population prevention Risk-factor reduction plus screening and precursor removal Benefit depends on implementation and participation (Keum 2019, PMID 31455888)
Localized colon treatment Oncologic resection; selective adjuvant fluoropyrimidine ± oxaliplatin Stage, fitness, MMR and recurrence risk matter (André 2015, PMID 26527776)
Localized rectal treatment Risk-adapted surgery, radiation and systemic therapy; organ preservation for selected responders MRI staging and high-intensity surveillance are prerequisites (Garcia-Aguilar 2022, PMID 35483010)
Metastatic treatment Cytotoxic backbone plus biology-selected targeted or immune therapy Resectable/ablatable oligometastatic disease is a distinct state (Biller 2021, PMID 33591350)
Universal tumor marker MMR protein immunohistochemistry or MSI testing Identifies treatment biology and triggers Lynch evaluation (Eikenboom 2022, PMID 33887476)

Disease development

The classic model described stepwise genetic alteration during colorectal-tumor development, with APC-pathway disruption early and additional oncogenic and tumor-suppressor changes accumulating during clonal progression (Vogelstein 1988, PMID 2841597). Modern genomic data retain that evolutionary logic but reject a single obligatory sequence: TCGA found hypermutated and non-hypermutated groups, with recurrent WNT, MAPK, PI3K, TGF-β and TP53-pathway alterations (Cancer Genome Atlas Network 2012, PMID 22810696).

The serrated route is biologically and endoscopically distinct. Sessile serrated lesions are often flat and proximal, frequently carry BRAF activation and can acquire CpG-island methylation; MLH1 silencing can yield sporadic MSI-high cancer (O'Brien 2015, PMID 25263173; De Palma 2019, PMID 31330830). Their subtle morphology and incomplete resection contribute to post-colonoscopy cancer risk.

Three instability frameworks overlap rather than partition every tumor cleanly:

Framework Typical biology Clinical use today
Chromosomal instability Aneuploidy, copy-number change, APC/TP53 pathway disruption Broad biological class; no single routine test dictates therapy (Cancer Genome Atlas Network 2012, PMID 22810696)
MSI/MMR deficiency Hypermutation from mismatch-repair failure Lynch triage, prognosis and immune-therapy selection (Kloor 2014, PMID 24048684)
CpG-island methylator phenotype Coordinated promoter methylation; often serrated/BRAF-associated Explains pathway biology; not a stand-alone routine drug selector (De Palma 2019, PMID 31330830)
Consensus molecular subtypes CMS1 immune, CMS2 canonical, CMS3 metabolic, CMS4 mesenchymal Reproducible research taxonomy, not yet a universal bedside algorithm (Guinney 2015, PMID 26457759)

See adenoma–carcinoma and serrated pathways and molecular subtypes and tumor microenvironment.

Presentation and diagnostic workup

Presentation ranges from screen detection to anemia, rectal bleeding, altered bowel habit, pain, obstruction or perforation. Symptoms are not sufficiently specific to stage disease; tissue diagnosis and anatomical staging are required.

The core workup is colon visualization with biopsy, complete-colon assessment when feasible, CT of chest/abdomen/pelvis for distant disease, serum CEA as a prognostic/surveillance baseline, and high-resolution pelvic MRI for rectal tumors. In the MERCURY prospective study, MRI predicted a clear circumferential resection margin with 92% specificity, and 94% of patients predicted clear actually had clear margins at surgery (MERCURY Study Group 2006, PMID 16984925).

Resection pathology must report tumor site and size, histologic type and grade, depth, margins, lymph nodes, tumor deposits, lymphovascular/perineural invasion, treatment response when relevant and MMR/MSI status. Higher lymph-node evaluation is associated with improved survival and more reliable stage assignment, although observational evidence cannot separate staging quality from surgical/pathology quality (Chang 2007, PMID 17374833).

Tumor budding—single cells or clusters of up to four cells at the invasive front—has a standardized three-tier assessment and carries prognostic information in pT1 and stage II disease (Lugli 2017, PMID 28548122). See pathology, staging and diagnostic workup.

Epidemiology, risk and inherited disease

In 2020, incidence ranged from 40.6 per 100,000 among men in Australia/New Zealand and European regions to 4.4 per 100,000 among women in several African regions and Southern Asia; mortality ranged from 20.2 per 100,000 among men in Eastern Europe to 2.5 among women in Southern Asia (Morgan 2023, PMID 36604116). These contrasts reflect exposure, detection, registration and access to treatment, not innate national biology.

Most colorectal cancers are sporadic. Established modifiable exposures cluster around adiposity, physical inactivity, smoking, alcohol and dietary patterns, while inflammatory bowel disease and inherited syndromes define smaller high-risk groups (Keum 2019, PMID 31455888).

Early-onset disease is a population signal rather than a distinct histologic diagnosis. Incidence under age 50 has risen across multiple regions and birth cohorts; a 2023 synthesis projected that by 2030 young-onset disease could constitute 11% of colon and 23% of rectal cancers (Spaander 2023, PMID 37105987). Approximately 20% of young-onset cases in that review had a hereditary syndrome, leaving most without an identified monogenic cause.

Universal tumor MMR screening detects a pooled 2.00% prevalence of germline MMR pathogenic variants across 58,580 colorectal cancers, but completion failures occur at both immunohistochemistry and germline-testing steps (Eikenboom 2022, PMID 33887476). Broader unselected germline panels found pathogenic variants in 14.2% of 34,244 tested patients, with 38.2% receiving a variant of uncertain significance—illustrating both added yield and interpretive burden (Coughlin 2022, PMID 36370464). See hereditary syndromes and genetics.

Screening and prevention

Screening modalities have different biological targets and implementation requirements:

Strategy What a positive test means Central limitation
FIT Human hemoglobin detected in stool Repetition is required; positive tests need colonoscopy (Lee 2014, PMID 24658694)
Multitarget stool DNA/FIT Composite molecular and hemoglobin signal Higher sensitivity accompanies more false positives and colonoscopy use (Imperiale 2014, PMID 24645800)
Flexible sigmoidoscopy Direct distal-colon inspection and polypectomy Proximal colon is not directly examined; sex/site effects differ (Wooldrage 2024, PMID 39038482)
Colonoscopy Whole-colon inspection, biopsy and removal Invasive, resource-intensive and operator-quality dependent (Corley 2014, PMID 24693890)
Blood cfDNA Cancer-associated methylation/fragment signal Stage I and advanced-precursor sensitivity remain limiting (Chung 2024, PMID 38477985)

USPSTF recommends average-risk screening from 45 through 75 and individualized selection from 76 through 85 (US Preventive Services Task Force 2021, PMID 34003218). The age threshold is not a declaration that risk starts at 45; it is a population balance of disease burden, benefit, harm and resources.

NordICC randomized invitation to colonoscopy versus usual care. At 10 years, intention-to-screen analysis found risk ratios of 0.82 for colorectal-cancer incidence and 0.90 for colorectal-cancer death, with only 42% accepting colonoscopy; the mortality confidence interval crossed 1 (Bretthauer 2022, PMID 36214590). Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy has longer randomized follow-up showing durable incidence and mortality reduction (Wooldrage 2024, PMID 39038482). Organized FIT data show lower colorectal-cancer mortality among repeatedly screened people, while remaining vulnerable to adherence and healthy-user confounding (Doubeni 2024, PMID 39028667).

Removal of adenomas is associated with lower long-term colorectal-cancer mortality than expected in historical comparison, but residual risk depends on baseline findings and surveillance quality (Zauber 2012, PMID 22356322; He 2020, PMID 31302144). See screening and early detection.

Stage-defined treatment map

State Treatment anchor Major evidence question
Localized colon En-bloc oncologic colectomy with regional nodes Which stage II/III patients need how much adjuvant therapy?
Stage III colon Fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin for fit patients CAPOX versus FOLFOX and 3 versus 6 months by risk/toxicity (André 2020, PMID 33271092)
Locally advanced rectum MRI-directed neoadjuvant therapy plus TME or response-adapted preservation Which sequence maximizes disease control and function?
Resectable metastases Surgery/ablation integrated with systemic therapy Biology and recurrence risk may outweigh technical resectability
Unresectable metastatic Biomarker- and fitness-directed systemic treatment Sequence to maximize survival, quality of life and later local options

MOSAIC established durable benefit from adding oxaliplatin to fluorouracil/leucovorin for stage III colon cancer, with 10-year overall survival 67.1% versus 59.0%; no overall-survival benefit was shown in stage II (André 2015, PMID 26527776). IDEA showed that the noninferiority question for 3 versus 6 months cannot be separated from regimen and risk group; less exposure materially reduces cumulative neuropathy (André 2020, PMID 33271092).

For locally advanced rectal cancer, RAPIDO reduced disease-related treatment failure with short-course radiation followed by chemotherapy, but 5-year follow-up showed higher locoregional recurrence than standard chemoradiation (Bahadoer 2021, PMID 33301740; Dijkstra 2023, PMID 36661037). OPRA showed that consolidation chemotherapy after chemoradiation produced more organ preservation than induction sequencing without an apparent disease-free-survival penalty in the randomized phase II setting (Garcia-Aguilar 2022, PMID 35483010; Verheij 2024, PMID 37883738).

Metastatic and precision treatment

First-line metastatic treatment integrates performance status, organ function, symptoms, resectability, primary side and molecular profile. FOLFOX, CAPOX and FOLFIRI are common doublets; selected fit patients may receive FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab. TRIBE2 improved progression-free survival after two treatments with planned FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab reintroduction versus sequential doublets, at the cost of greater intensity (Cremolini 2020, PMID 32164906).

Primary-tumor side is a clinical composite. In RAS/BRAF-wild-type disease, pooled randomized evidence supports an EGFR-antibody advantage predominantly for left-sided primaries, while right-sided tumors have different biology and treatment response (Rossini 2023, PMID 36913832).

Biomarker Treatment implication Evidence anchor
MSI-high/dMMR Checkpoint blockade is preferred in metastatic disease Pembrolizumab improved PFS versus chemotherapy (André 2020, PMID 33264544)
BRAF V600E BRAF plus EGFR blockade; chemotherapy combination moved earlier BEACON and BREAKWATER (Tabernero 2021, PMID 33503393; Kopetz 2025, PMID 39863775)
HER2 amplification, RAS wild type Dual HER2 targeting after standard therapy MOUNTAINEER response data (Strickler 2023, PMID 37142372)
KRAS G12C KRAS G12C plus EGFR inhibition Sotorasib/panitumumab improved PFS versus late-line control (Fakih 2023, PMID 37870968)
NTRK fusion TRK inhibitor Histology-agnostic pooled evidence; fusions are rare (Hong 2020, PMID 32105622)

Selected liver- or lung-limited metastases may be treated with curative intent. Perioperative FOLFOX improved progression-free but not overall survival for initially resectable liver metastases in EORTC 40983 (Nordlinger 2013, PMID 24120480). Pulmonary metastasectomy remains much less secure: the small randomized PulMiCC trial showed unexpectedly good control survival and could not establish the magnitude of surgical benefit (Treasure 2019, PMID 31831062). See metastatic systemic therapy, precision oncology, and liver and lung metastasis.

Outcomes beyond tumor control

Colorectal cancer treatment can leave persistent bowel, sexual, urinary and neuropathic effects. Low anterior resection syndrome is a symptom constellation of urgency, clustering, frequency and incontinence after rectal resection; a population study found major LARS in 53.1% at mean 6.7 years after surgery, with lower quality of life (Pieniowski 2020, PMID 32530135). Survivorship therefore includes recurrence surveillance, second-cancer prevention, late-effect management, psychosocial health and financial consequences—not merely absence of recurrence (El-Shami 2015, PMID 26348643).

Central controversies

  1. Efficacy versus implementation in screening. Intention-to-screen effects include participation; per-protocol estimates lose randomization (Bretthauer 2022, PMID 36214590).
  2. Risk reduction versus overtreatment in localized disease. Clinicopathologic risk and postoperative ctDNA sometimes disagree (Tie 2022, PMID 35657320).
  3. Organ preservation versus occult residual disease. Clinical complete response is an imperfect surrogate; surveillance and salvage capacity determine safety (Verheij 2024, PMID 37883738).
  4. Technical resectability versus tumor biology. Adding cetuximab to perioperative chemotherapy worsened long-term outcomes in operable liver metastases despite EGFR sensitivity elsewhere (Bridgewater 2020, PMID 32014119).
  5. Rapid biomarker expansion versus access. Broad testing can reveal actionable findings but also variants of uncertain significance and geography-dependent treatment availability (Coughlin 2022, PMID 36370464).

Open questions

  • Can negative postoperative ctDNA safely support omission of chemotherapy across assays, stages and age groups? (Tie 2022, PMID 35657320)
  • Which response criteria and surveillance schedule make rectal watch-and-wait transferable beyond expert centers? (Verheij 2024, PMID 37883738)
  • Which combinations can make mismatch-repair-proficient colorectal cancer immune-responsive without unacceptable toxicity? (Ganesh 2019, PMID 30886395)
  • What childhood and birth-cohort exposures explain rising early-onset incidence? (Gupta 2024, PMID 38081492)
  • Can blood-based screening improve participation without sacrificing prevention of advanced precursors? (Chung 2024, PMID 38477985)

References

  1. Bray F, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024;74(3):229-263. PMID 38572751
  2. Bretthauer M, et al. Effect of Colonoscopy Screening on Risks of Colorectal Cancer and Related Death. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(17):1547-1556. PMID 36214590
  3. Doubeni CA, et al. Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening and Risk of Colorectal Cancer Death. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(7):e2423671. PMID 39028667
  4. André T, et al. Adjuvant Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in Stage II to III Colon Cancer: Updated 10-Year Survival and Outcomes According to BRAF Mutation and Mismatch Repair Status of the MOSAIC Study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(35):4176-87. PMID 26527776
  5. Bahadoer RR, et al. Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(1):29-42. PMID 33301740
  6. André T, et al. Pembrolizumab in Microsatellite-Instability-High Advanced Colorectal Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(23):2207-2218. PMID 33264544
  7. Tabernero J, et al. Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab as a New Standard of Care for Previously Treated BRAF V600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Updated Survival Results and Subgroup Analyses from the BEACON Study. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(4):273-284. PMID 33503393
  8. Strickler JH, et al. Tucatinib plus trastuzumab for chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-positive, RAS wild-type unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (MOUNTAINEER): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2023;24(5):496-508. PMID 37142372
  9. MERCURY Study Group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study. BMJ. 2006;333(7572):779. PMID 16984925
  10. Morgan E, et al. Global burden of colorectal cancer in 2020 and 2040: incidence and mortality estimates from GLOBOCAN. Gut. 2023;72(2):338-344. PMID 36604116
  11. Sullivan BA, Noujaim M, Roper J. Cause, Epidemiology, and Histology of Polyps and Pathways to Colorectal Cancer. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2022;32(2):177-194. PMID 35361330
  12. Keum N, Giovannucci E. Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(12):713-732. PMID 31455888
  13. Garcia-Aguilar J, et al. Organ Preservation in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(23):2546-2556. PMID 35483010
  14. Biller LH, Schrag D. Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Review. JAMA. 2021;325(7):669-685. PMID 33591350
  15. Eikenboom EL, et al. Universal Immunohistochemistry for Lynch Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 58,580 Colorectal Carcinomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;20(3):e496-e507. PMID 33887476
  16. Vogelstein B, et al. Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(9):525-32. PMID 2841597
  17. Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature. 2012;487(7407):330-7. PMID 22810696
  18. O'Brien MJ, Zhao Q, Yang S. Colorectal serrated pathway cancers and precursors. Histopathology. 2015;66(1):49-65. PMID 25263173
  19. De Palma FDE, et al. The Molecular Hallmarks of the Serrated Pathway in Colorectal Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(7). PMID 31330830
  20. Kloor M, et al. Clinical significance of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014;399(1):23-31. PMID 24048684
  21. Guinney J, et al. The consensus molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer. Nat Med. 2015;21(11):1350-6. PMID 26457759
  22. Chang GJ, et al. Lymph node evaluation and survival after curative resection of colon cancer: systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(6):433-41. PMID 17374833
  23. Lugli A, et al. Recommendations for reporting tumor budding in colorectal cancer based on the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) 2016. Mod Pathol. 2017;30(9):1299-1311. PMID 28548122
  24. Spaander MCW, et al. Young-onset colorectal cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2023;9(1):21. PMID 37105987
  25. Coughlin SE, et al. Multigene Panel Testing Yields High Rates of Clinically Actionable Variants Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer. JCO Precis Oncol. 2022;6:e2200517. PMID 36370464
  26. Lee JK, et al. Accuracy of fecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(3):171. PMID 24658694
  27. Imperiale TF, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(14):1287-97. PMID 24645800
  28. Wooldrage K, et al. Long-term effects of once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 21-year follow-up of the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024;9(9):811-824. PMID 39038482
  29. Corley DA, et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(14):1298-306. PMID 24693890
  30. Chung DC, et al. A Cell-free DNA Blood-Based Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening. N Engl J Med. 2024;390(11):973-983. PMID 38477985
  31. US Preventive Services Task Force, et al. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021;325(19):1965-1977. PMID 34003218
  32. Zauber AG, et al. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(8):687-96. PMID 22356322
  33. He X, et al. Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer After Removal of Conventional Adenomas and Serrated Polyps. Gastroenterology. 2020;158(4):852-861.e4. PMID 31302144
  34. André T, et al. Effect of duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer (IDEA collaboration): final results from a prospective, pooled analysis of six randomised, phase 3 trials. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(12):1620-1629. PMID 33271092
  35. Dijkstra EA, et al. Locoregional Failure During and After Short-course Radiotherapy Followed by Chemotherapy and Surgery Compared With Long-course Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery: A 5-Year Follow-up of the RAPIDO Trial. Ann Surg. 2023;278(4):e766-e772. PMID 36661037
  36. Verheij FS, et al. Long-Term Results of Organ Preservation in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: The Randomized Phase II OPRA Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(5):500-506. PMID 37883738
  37. Cremolini C, et al. Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab and reintroduction after progression versus mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRIBE2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(4):497-507. PMID 32164906
  38. Rossini D, et al. Primary tumour side as a driver for treatment choice in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and pooled analysis of randomised trials. Eur J Cancer. 2023;184:106-116. PMID 36913832
  39. Kopetz S, et al. Encorafenib, cetuximab and chemotherapy in BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med. 2025;31(3):901-908. PMID 39863775
  40. Fakih MG, et al. Sotorasib plus Panitumumab in Refractory Colorectal Cancer with Mutated KRAS G12C. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(23):2125-2139. PMID 37870968
  41. Hong DS, et al. Larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion-positive solid tumours: a pooled analysis of three phase 1/2 clinical trials. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(4):531-540. PMID 32105622
  42. Nordlinger B, et al. Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC 40983): long-term results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(12):1208-15. PMID 24120480
  43. Treasure T, et al. Pulmonary Metastasectomy versus Continued Active Monitoring in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC): a multicentre randomised clinical trial. Trials. 2019;20(1):718. PMID 31831062
  44. Pieniowski EHA, et al. Prevalence of low anterior resection syndrome and impact on quality of life after rectal cancer surgery: population-based study. BJS Open. 2020;4(5):935-942. PMID 32530135
  45. El-Shami K, et al. American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(6):428-55. PMID 26348643
  46. Tie J, et al. Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis Guiding Adjuvant Therapy in Stage II Colon Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(24):2261-2272. PMID 35657320
  47. Bridgewater JA, et al. Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (New EPOC): long-term results of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(3):398-411. PMID 32014119
  48. Ganesh K, et al. Immunotherapy in colorectal cancer: rationale, challenges and potential. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(6):361-375. PMID 30886395
  49. Gupta S, et al. Birth Cohort Colorectal Cancer (CRC): Implications for Research and Practice. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024;22(3):455-469.e7. PMID 38081492