Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27602921›Full record

ArticleDiseases of the colon and rectum2016

Patient-Reported Roles, Preferences, and Expectations Regarding Treatment of Stage I Rectal Cancer in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium.

C Tyler Ellis, Mary E Charlton, Karyn B Stitzenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Shared decision-making in radiotherapy for rectal cancer - A systematic review.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

C Tyler Ellis1 Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 2 Department of Epidemiology, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, Iowa 3 Department of Surgical Oncology, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Mary E Charlton
Karyn B Stitzenberg
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Iowa · US

Funding

Viral VectorP30CA086862 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Mark E Burkard · 2000 to 2026
$70.0M
PROPENSITY SCORES IN HIERARCHICAL MODELSU01CA093344 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI AYANIAN, JOHN Z., FOUAD, MONA N. · 2001 to 2011
$19.5M
UNC-CH TRAINING PROGRAM IN HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCHT32HS000032 · AHRQ · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HOLMES, GEORGE M · 1989 to 2024
$8.2M
Lung/Colon Cancer Outcomes--Cancer Research NetworkU01CA093332 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE · PI WEEKS, JANE C. · 2001 to 2008
$7.4M
RAND-UCLA CanCORS PDCR ApplicationU01CA093348 · NCI · RAND CORPORATION · PI KAHN, KATHERINE LESLIE · 2001 to 2008
$7.3M
Cancer Care Outcomes Research &Surveillance ConsortiumU01CA093324 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI AYANIAN, JOHN Z. · 2001 to 2008
$7.1M
RACIAL DISPARITIES IN END OF LIFE CARE--ACCESSU01CA093329 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI FOUAD, MONA N. · 2001 to 2008
$6.6M
NC Colorectal Cancer Care Outcomes Research StudyU01CA093326 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SANDLER, ROBERT S. · 2001 to 2008
$4.3M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS000032NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093324NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093326NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093329NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093332NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093344NCI NIH HHS U01 CA093348
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHistorically, stage I rectal cancer was treated with total mesorectal excision. However, there has been growing use of local excision, with and without adjuvant therapy, to treat these early rectal cancers. Little is known about how patients and providers choose among the various treatment approaches.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify patient roles, preferences, and expectations as they relate to treatment decision making for patients with stage I rectal cancer.

designThis is a population-based study. SETTINGS: The study included a geographically diverse population and health-system-based cohort. PATIENTS: A total of 154 adults with newly diagnosed and surgically treated stage I rectal cancer between 2003 and 2005 were included.

main outcome measuresWe compared patients by surgical treatment groups, including total mesorectal excision and local excision. Clinical, sociodemographic, and health-system factors were assessed for association with patient decision-making preferences and expectations.

resultsA total of 80% of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision versus 63% of patients who underwent local excision expected that surgery would be curative (p = 0.04). The total mesorectal excision group was less likely to report that radiation would cure their cancer compared with the local excision group (27% vs 63%; p = 0.004). When asked about their preferred role in decision making, 28% of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision preferred patient-controlled decision making compared with 48% of patients who underwent local excision (p = 0.046). However, with regard to the treatment actually received, 38% of the total mesorectal excision group reported making their own surgical decision compared with 25% of the local excision group (p = 0.18). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its sample size.

conclusionsThe preferred decision-making role for patients did not match the actual decision-making process. Future efforts should focus on bridging the gap between the decision-making process and patient preferences regarding various treatment approaches. This will be particularly important as newer innovative procedures play a more prominent role in the rectal cancer treatment paradigm.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaColectomyDecision MakingPostoperative ComplicationsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePatient Care ManagementPatient ParticipationPatient PreferenceRectal NeoplasmsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID27602921
PMCPMC5015654
OpenAlexW2511247429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.