Loading
Genetic Factors in Colorectal Cancer / Multiple and Secondary Primary Cancers · Journal article
Frontiers in Oncology · August 18, 2026
Well-designed and adequately powered for the question it asks.
This prospective multicenter registry of 2,101 unselected Russian colorectal cancer patients found mismatch repair deficiency in 10.5% (95% CI 9.2–11.8%), with significant variation by anatomical site, grade, and sex. Independent predictors included right-sided location, high-grade histology, and female sex, while advanced stage and older age were inversely associated; however, clinicopathological features alone cannot identify all affected patients, supporting universal testing.
Prospective multicenter non-interventional cross-sectional registry. Consecutive unselected patients with primary colorectal adenocarcinoma at six specialised centres in Moscow; 2,140 registered, 2,101 included after exclusion of synchronous multiple primary tumours. Intervention: Mismatch repair status determination by immunohistochemistry, polymerase chain reaction-based microsatellite analysis, or both. n = 2,101. Six specialised centres in Moscow, Russia.
Overall mismatch repair deficiency prevalence was 10.5% (95% CI 9.2–11.8%) in 2,101 patients Prevalence was 23.2% in right-sided tumours, 6.2% in left-sided tumours, and 2.8% in rectal tumours (p 0.001) Poorly differentiated tumours had 32.4% mismatch repair deficiency versus 8.4% in low-grade tumours (p 0.001)
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
These findings support universal mismatch repair testing in all colorectal cancer patients rather than selective testing based on clinical or pathological criteria alone, as clinicopathological features cannot reliably identify all affected patients. The prevalence estimates are aligned with international data, validating the applicability of existing guidelines in the Russian population.
Large prospective multicenter registry study with rigorous cross-sectional design and complete clinicopathological data, providing population-level prevalence estimates and validated independent predictors of mismatch repair deficiency in an unselected colorectal cancer cohort.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
These findings support universal mismatch repair testing in all colorectal cancer patients rather than selective testing based on clinical or pathological criteria alone, as clinicopathological features cannot reliably identify all affected patients. The prevalence estimates are aligned with international data, validating the applicability of existing guidelines in the Russian population.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Background Microsatellite instability/mismatch repair deficiency are well-established predictive biomarkers for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and are used to identify candidates for Lynch syndrome screening in colorectal cancer. In Russia, population-level data on their prevalence are limited — most published series are small, retrospective, or enriched for metastatic disease. Methods We performed a pre-specified cross-sectional analysis within a prospective non-interventional registry that enrolled consecutive, unselected patients with primary colorectal adenocarcinoma at six specialised centres in Moscow between August 2022 and December 2025. Of 2,140 patients registered, 2,101 were included after exclusion of synchronous multiple primary tumours. Mismatch repair status was determined by immunohistochemistry, polymerase chain reaction-based microsatellite analysis, or both, following each centre’s standard diagnostic protocol. Logistic regression was used to identify independent clinicopathological predictors of mismatch repair deficiency. Results Mismatch repair deficiency was detected in 220 patients, giving an overall prevalence of 10.5% (95% confidence interval 9.2–11.8%). Prevalence was 23.2% in right-sided tumours, 6.2% in left-sided tumours, and 2.8% in rectal tumours (p 0.001). Among graded tumours, poorly differentiated cases had a rate of 32.4% versus 8.4% in low-grade tumours (p 0.001). Female patients accounted for 70.0% of mismatch repair-deficient cases versus 50.1% of proficient cases (p 0.001). On multivariate analysis, right-sided location (odds ratio 3.67; 95% confidence interval 2.57–5.31), high-grade histology (odds ratio 4.15; 95% confidence interval 2.79–6.13), and female sex (odds ratio for male sex 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.34–0.69) were independently associated with mismatch repair deficiency, while advanced stage (odds ratio 0.64; 95% confidence interval 0.46–0.89) and older age (odds ratio 0.98 per year; 95% confidence interval 0.97–1.00) showed inverse associations. Despite these associations, a meaningful proportion of mismatch repair-deficient cases occurred outside conventional high-risk clinicopathological groups. Conclusion Mismatch repair deficiency prevalence in unselected Russian colorectal cancer patients matches international estimates. Clinicopathological features alone are not sufficient to identify all affected patients. To our knowledge, this is the largest prospective multicentre series from Russia to date. Our data support universal mismatch repair testing rather than selective testing based on clinical or pathological criteria (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05495776).
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.