Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Reporting colorectal cancer.

J R Jass1, B C Morson

  • 1Pathology Department, St Mark's Hospital, London.

Journal of Clinical Pathology
|September 1, 1987
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The Dukes classification for rectal cancer has led to confusion in comparing patient prognoses and treatment outcomes. A new prognostic system, informed by modern statistics, offers superior patient grouping for rectal cancer surgery.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Hiatus hernia with adenocarcinoma arising in the region of the cardia.

The Journal of the Faculty of Radiologists. Faculty of Radiologists (Great Britain)·2014
Same author

Ischæmic diseases of the colon [abridged].

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine·2010
Same author

Pelvic Recurrence after Excision of Rectum for Carcinoma.

British medical journal·2010
Same author

Malignant Lymphoid Tumours of the Intestinal Tract [Summary].

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine·2009
Same author

Cuthbert E Dukes OBE MD MSc FRCS FRCPath DPH -1890-1977.

Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England·2009
Same author

Role of RHAMM within the hierarchy of well-established prognostic factors in colorectal cancer.

Gut·2008
Same journal

Defining biochemical, pathological and molecular factors prognostic in terms of disease control and survival in high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a scoping review.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
Same journal

MILGDF: a multi-task, instance-level supervised model for oral squamous cell carcinoma integrating local-global attention and dynamic decision fusion.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
Same journal

Paediatric B-lymphoblastic leukaemia with low peripheral blasts: a potential diagnostic pitfall.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
Same journal

MRI-targeted versus systematic needle core biopsies in prostate cancer: a patient-based analysis of potential diagnostic and biologic underestimation.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
Same journal

Basal plasmacytosis and eosinophilia for distinguishing inflammatory bowel disease from gastrointestinal tuberculosis on mucosal biopsy.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
Same journal

Assay-dependent variability in free thyroxine (FT4): differential interference related to immunoassay design in a patient with subclinical hypothyroidism.

Journal of clinical pathology·2026
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Pathology
  • Medical Statistics

Background:

  • The Dukes classification, developed for rectal cancer, has evolved significantly since its inception.
  • Numerous modifications and alternative systems have created confusion in comparing pathological data and treatment outcomes across institutions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address the limitations and confusion surrounding the Dukes classification for rectal cancer.
  • To develop a more accurate and clinically relevant prognostic system for patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer.

Main Methods:

  • Review of the historical development and modifications of the Dukes classification.
  • Application of modern statistical methods to identify independent pathological variables influencing prognosis.
  • Development of a new prognostic categorization system based on identified variables.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The existing Dukes classification can lead to difficulties in comparing findings and treatment results between different centers.
  • Modern statistical analysis can identify pathological variables with independent clinical importance.
  • A novel prognostic system has been developed that improves upon the Dukes classification.

Conclusions:

  • A new prognostic system for rectal cancer provides clearer patient stratification than the traditional Dukes classification.
  • Accurate pathological data collection and specimen examination are crucial for effective cancer reporting.
  • The developed system enhances the ability to group patients with distinct prognostic implications, aiding treatment decisions.