Trial reportThe oncologist2015
Chemotherapy Alone for Patients With Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Undergoing Radical Surgery.
Trial report in The oncologist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone for the locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review.International journal of clinical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Sequential short-course radiation therapy and chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019Trial
- Senescent endothelial cell-derived extracellular vesicles promote neoadjuvant chemoresistance in colorectal cancer via GPX4.Communications biology · 2026Article
- The optimal time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for patients with an unfavorable pathological response in locally advanced rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- MRI-defined high-risk rectal cancer patients: outcome comparison between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus TME and TME plus adjuvant chemotherapy or TME alone.The British journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy without Radiation in Colorectal Cancer.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2020Review
- Article
- Feasibility of Neoadjuvant FOLFOX Therapy Without Radiotherapy for Baseline Resectable Rectal Cancer.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this prospective pilot study was to determine the efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy with six cycles of FOLFOX 6 (without radiation therapy) followed by radical surgery followed by six additional cycles of FOLFOX 6 for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom January 2010 to January 2014, patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who met the eligibility criteria were enrolled in this study. Patients received FOLFOX 6 chemotherapy comprising oxaliplatin and leucovorin calcium i.v. over 2 hours on day 1, then bolus, and then continuous fluorouracil i.v. over 46 hours on days 1 and 2. Treatment was repeated every 14 days for 6 courses followed by radical surgery followed by additional 6 cycles of FOLFOX 6.
resultsIn total, 45 patients were enrolled in this study. In the preoperative re-evaluation, the overall response rate was 68.8% (clinical complete response was 4.4%, and the partial response was 64.4%). There were 14 cases (31.2%) of stable disease. No patients had progressive disease. Postoperatively, the pathologic complete response rate was 8 of 45 (17.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.9%-28.9%). The median follow-up was 29 months (range 9-54 months). The actuarial 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates for all patients were 80.8% (standard error, 1.877; 95% CI: 69.3%-92.3%) and 67.9% (standard error, 2.319; 95% CI: 54.3%-81.5%), respectively.
conclusionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (FOLFOX) without radiotherapy is active and safe but cannot be considered a standard of care until the results of prospective randomized phase III trials are available. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy of rectal cancer represents the current standard of care. However, its use is also associated with short-term toxicity and long-term morbidity. With the increasing use of total mesorectal resection resulting in better local control and advances in systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, this study highlights the question of whether radiation is a necessary component of neoadjuvant therapy for all patients with rectal cancer or whether select patients could be spared the additional toxicities and inconvenience of radiotherapy. This study suggests that neoadjuvant FOLFOX without radiotherapy is active and safe, but it could not be considered a standard of care till now.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.