ArticleDigestive surgery2018
Clinical Pattern of Recurrent Disease during the Follow-Up of Rectal Carcinoma.
Article in Digestive surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Post recurrence survival in early versus late period and its prognostic factors in rectal cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Rectal cancer pelvic recurrence: imaging patterns and key concepts to guide treatment planning.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- Identifying Recurrences Among Non-Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Using National Health Data Registries: Validation and Optimization of a Registry-Based Algorithm in a Modern Danish Cohort.Clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer According to a Standardized MRI Classification System: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Early Versus Late Recurrence in Rectal Cancer: Does Timing Matter?Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsSeveral initiatives have started to transfer colorectal cancer follow-up (FU) from secondary to primary care. For this purpose, it is important to assess when and how recurrences of rectal carcinoma are detected after treatment with curative intent.
methodsRetrospective multicentre cohort study. Patients participating in an FU programme after curative intended treatment for rectal cancer stages I-III between 2007 and 2014.
resultsOf the 378 patients, 64 (17%) developed recurrent disease (RD). Most were detected during scheduled FU consultations (n = 55) by (a combination of) radiological examinations and carcinoembryonic antigen levels, and were asymptomatic (n = 53); outside scheduled FU consultations, RD was detected during the treatment of postoperative complications or ostomy reversal (n = 5), or due to symptoms (n = 4). Most frequent sites of recurrence were liver (50%), lung (44%), multiple (22%) or locoregional (16%). Treatment of RD with curative intent was performed more frequently when detected during scheduled FU (60 vs. 22%). The only predictive factor for developing RD was stage III disease on initial presentation.
conclusionsThe majority of rectal cancer patients are diagnosed with RD at an asymptomatic stage during scheduled FU consultations. Only a few patients presented with RD outside the FU programme. Arguably, general practitioners could order these same diagnostic tests during FU.
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.