ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2017
Tumor stage in patients operated for rectal cancer: a comparison of the pre-operative MR and the resection specimen, with specific attention to the effect of neo-adjuvant radiotherapy.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impacts of neoadjuvant therapy on the number of dissected lymph nodes in esophagogastric junction cancer patients.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- How We Treat Localized Rectal Cancer-An Institutional Paradigm for Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.Cancers · 2022Review
- Machine learning-based multiparametric MRI radiomics for predicting poor responders after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal Cancer patients.BMC cancer · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluate the preoperative TN stage with MR and the postoperative stage with histology.
methodsPatients diagnosed with rectal cancer (2002-2015) and a pre-operative MR were included. A chart review was done. Pathology reports were evaluated for the post-operative tumor stage. Down staging was defined as a lower disease stage in the resection specimen compared with the pre-operative MR. Upgrading ("progression") was defined as a higher disease stage in the resection specimen. The study was approved by ethical committee of the Zaans Medisch Centrum.
resultsFrom 176 out of 231 operated patients a pre-operative MR was available for evaluation. 142 patients (80.7%) underwent neo-adjuvant treatment; the remainder 19.3% underwent immediate surgery. Neo-adjuvant therapy resulted in significant down staging. However, almost 14% of patients had a higher TN stage as determined by the pre-operative MR. In patients who underwent immediate surgery the percentage with "progression" was 30%. The number of patients with stage 1 and 2 were higher in the group not treated with neo-adjuvant therapy. There was no significant difference in tumor stage as determined by histological examination of the resection specimen.
conclusionsThe diagnostic accuracy of the MR is not perfect. Underestimation as well as overestimation of the tumor occurred both in the patients treated with radiotherapy as well as those who underwent immediate operation. As such, MR results should be interpreted with caution when devising a treatment strategy.
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.