Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27729748›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2016

Defining response to radiotherapy in rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging and histopathological scales.

Muhammed R S Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Nicholas J Battersby, Manish Chand, Nicholas P West, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Paris P Tekkis, Gina Brown

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Staging of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Beyond TME.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Muhammed R S SiddiquiMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Jemma BhodayMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Nicholas J BattersbyMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Manish ChandMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Nicholas P WestMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Al-Mutaz AbulafiMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Paris P TekkisMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.
Gina BrownMuhammed RS Siddiqui, Jemma Bhoday, Manish Chand, Al-Mutaz Abulafi, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, London CR7 7YE, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo define good and poor regression using pathology and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regression scales after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer.

methodsA systematic review was performed on all studies up to December 2015, without language restriction, that were identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960-2015), and EMBASE (1991-2015). Searches were performed of article bibliographies and conference abstracts. MeSH and text words used included "tumour regression", "mrTRG", "poor response" and "colorectal cancers". Clinical studies using either MRI or histopathological tumour regression grade (TRG) scales to define good and poor responders were included in relation to outcomes [local recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS)]. There was no age restriction or stage of cancer restriction for patient inclusion. Data were extracted by two authors working independently and using pre-defined outcome measures.

resultsQuantitative data (prevalence) were extracted and analysed according to meta-analytical techniques using comprehensive meta-analysis. Qualitative data (LR, DR, DFS and OS) were presented as ranges. The overall proportion of poor responders after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) was 37.7% (95%CI: 30.1-45.8). There were 19 different reported histopathological scales and one MRI regression scale (mrTRG). Clinical studies used nine and six histopathological scales for poor and good responders, respectively. All studies using MRI to define good and poor response used one scale. The most common histopathological definition for good response was the Mandard grades 1 and 2 or Dworak grades 3 and 4; Mandard 3, 4 and 5 and Dworak 0, 1 and 2 were used for poor response. For histopathological grades, the 5-year outcomes for poor responders were LR 3.4%-4.3%, DR 14.3%-20.3%, DFS 61.7%-68.1% and OS 60.7-69.1. Good pathological response 5-year outcomes were LR 0%-1.8%, DR 0%-11.6%, DFS 78.4%-86.7%, and OS 77.4%-88.2%. A poor response on MRI (mrTRG 4,5) resulted in 5-year LR 4%-29%, DR 9%, DFS 31%-59% and OS 27%-68%. The 5-year outcomes with a good response on MRI (mrTRG 1,2 and 3) were LR 1%-14%, DR 3%, DFS 64%-83% and OS 72%-90%.

conclusionFor histopathology regression assessment, Mandard 1, 2/Dworak 3, 4 should be used for good response and Mandard 3, 4, 5/Dworak 0, 1, 2 for poor response. MRI indicates good and poor response by mrTRG1-3 and mrTRG4-5, respectively.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDisease-Free SurvivalHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingRectal NeoplasmsRiskTreatment OutcomemrTRGNeo-adjuvant therapyPoor responseRectal cancerTumour regression

Identifiers

PMID27729748
PMCPMC5055872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.