SynthesisScientific reports2015
Short Course Radiation in the Treatment of Localized Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy Versus No Radiotherapy for Stage IV Rectal Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2018Pooled it
- Nonoperative Management of Rectal Cancer: Is "Near-Complete" Response Safe to Surveil?Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- ACO/ARO/AIO-22 - External beam radiotherapy combined with endorectal high-dose-rate brachytherapy in elderly and frail patients with rectal cancer: A prospective multicentre trial of the German Rectal Cancer Study Group.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Quality of life and clinical outcomes in rectal cancer patients treated on a 1.5T MR-Linac within the MOMENTUM study.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Review
- Neoadjuvant Modified Short-Course Radiotherapy Followed by Delayed Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Cancers · 2021Article
- Clinical Reality and Treatment for Local Recurrence of Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Carcinoembryonic antigen as a marker of radioresistance in colorectal cancer: a potential role of macrophages.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Decision-Making Strategy for Rectal Cancer Management Using Radiation Therapy for Elderly or Comorbid Patients.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2018Review
- The high pCR rate of sandwich neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer may translate into a better long-term survival benefit: 5-year outcome of a Phase II clinical trial.Cancer management and research · 2018Article
- Dosimetric evaluation of magnetic resonance-generated synthetic CT for radiation treatment of rectal cancer.PloS one · 2018Article
- Neoadjuvant Strategies: Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2017Review
- Association Between Incomplete Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy and Survival for Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.JAMA surgery · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis sets out to systematically assess the efficacy of short course radiation (SRT) for rectal cancer patients based on randomized, controlled trials. Eight randomized controlled trials involving 6894 patients were ultimately included in this meta-analysis. Three trials (n = 2574) compared SRT with surgery alone. Local recurrence was improved (HR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.58). Overall survival was marginally improved with an HR of 0.90 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.00), but the magnitude of benefit was heterogeneous across trials. An additional three trials (n = 3682) compared SRT with selective postoperative radiation ± chemotherapy. A significant reduction of local recurrence (HR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.56) was also found after SRT. However, no benefit in overall survival was observed. Moreover, two trials (n = 638) compared SRT with long course chemoradiation. There was no statistically significant local recurrence or overall survival difference observed between the two strategies. Patients receiving SRT had lower grade 3 or 4 acute treatment related toxicity (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.22) whereas no difference in late toxicity was observed. Overall, SRT is a reasonable alternative for resectable rectal cancer patients and should be part of an informed discussion of treatment options for this group of patients.
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.