ArticleScientific reports2017
Population-based study of effectiveness of neoadjuvant radiotherapy on survival in US rectal cancer patients according to age.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. 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.
- Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on the oncological outcome of rectal cancer patients with pathological complete response.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic Factors of Rectal Cancer in Southern Iran.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2022Article
- Prognostic Factors Affecting Short- and Long-Term Recurrence-Free Survival of Patients with Rectal Cancer using Cure Models: A Cohort Study.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2020Article
- Cardiovascular diseases in survivors of childhood cancer.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2020Review
- Pleotropic role of RNA binding protein CELF2 in autophagy induction.Molecular carcinogenesis · 2019Article
- Comparative survival analysis of preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy in stage II-III rectal cancer on the basis of long-term population data.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent cancer researches pay more attention to younger patients due to the variable treatment response among different age groups. Here we investigated the effectiveness of neoadjuvant radiation on the survival of younger and older patients in stage II/III rectal cancer. Data was obtained from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (n = 12801). Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline covariates according to the status of neoadjuvant radiation. Our results showed that neoadjuvant radiation had better survival benefit (Log-rank P = 3.25e-06) and improved cancer-specific 3-year (87.6%; 95% CI: 86.4-88.7% vs. 84.1%; 95% CI: 82.8-85.3%) and 5-year survival rates (78.1%; 95% CI: 76.2-80.1% vs. 77%; 95% CI: 75.3-78.8%). In older groups (>50), neoadjuvant radiation was associated with survival benefits in stage II (HR: 0.741; 95% CI: 0.599-0.916; P = 5.80e-3) and stage III (HR: 0.656; 95% CI 0.564-0.764; P = 5.26e-08). Interestingly, neoadjuvant radiation did not increase survival rate in younger patients (< = 50) both in stage II (HR: 2.014; 95% CI: 0.9032-4.490; P = 0.087) and stage III (HR: 1.168; 95% CI: 0.829-1.646; P = 0.372). Additionally, neoadjuvant radiation significantly decreased the cancer-specific mortality in older patients, but increased mortality in younger patients. Our results provided new insights on the neoadjuvant radiation in rectal cancer, especially for the younger 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.