ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2017
Evaluation of treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumors sized under 20 mm in comparison with the WHO 2010 guidelines.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic Resection of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: How Deep Should We Go?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection of 1-1.5 cm sized grade 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumor: A retrospective study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Size matters: Establishing a cut-off for rectal neuroendocrine neoplasm to predict recurrence and standardize surveillance guidelines.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2025Article
- Innovative approaches in predicting outcomes for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Whole-exome sequencing reveals novel genomic signatures and potential therapeutic targets during the progression of rectal neuroendocrine neoplasm.Cell death & disease · 2024Article
- Comparing surgical and endoscopic resection approaches for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors within the diameter range of 10-20mm: an inverse probability weighting analysis based on the SEER database.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Endoscopic Resection for Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors Smaller than 15 mm.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- Multiple distant metastases arising from a single, low-grade rectal neuroendocrine tumor: an autopsy case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2023Article
- Rectal neuroendocrine tumors: Current advances in management, treatment, and surveillance.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Risk Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis and Oncologic Outcomes in Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors with Lymphovascular Invasion.Gut and liver · 2022Article
- Low-grade Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumor Recurring as Multiple Hepatic Metastasis after Complete Endoscopic Removal: A Case Report.The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2020Article
- Rectal neuroendocrine tumor developing lateral lymph node metastasis after curative resection: a case report.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Management of Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Tumors.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectal neuroendocrine tumor (NET) is a relatively rare lesion of the gastrointestinal tract, but the prospective examination with colonofiberoscopy or endoscopic ultrasound has increased the frequency of its detection. It is often difficult to determine the optimal treatment for NETs sized <20 mm in the clinical setting. Other clinicopathological variables are not considered in the current guidelines and staging systems. Although the effects of lymphovascular invasion are not covered by the World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 guidelines or tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system, this may be promising for the establishment of improved guidelines and staging systems, particularly for early-stage colorectal carcinoids. The aim of the present study was to evaluate rectal NETs sized <20 mm in comparison with the WHO 2010 guidelines. Between January 2005 and December 2013, 40 consecutive patients [26 men and 14 women; median age, 59.3 years (range, 34-81 years)] who underwent endoscopic resection of rectal NETs, and 12 patients undergoing surgical resection of rectal NETs, were enrolled in this retrospective study. The median tumor size was 7.4 mm (range, 3-15 mm). The locations of the NET were the rectosigmoid colon (n=3), the upper rectum (n=13), and the lower rectum (n=25). The NETs were classified by size as 0-5 (n=7), 6-10 (n=29) and 11-15 mm (n=4). The surgical procedures performed included low anterior resection plus esophagectomy (n=1), laparoscopic low anterior resection (n=7) and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (n=4). Only 1 patient had lymph node metastasis (tumor sized 6-10 mm, with lymphovascular invasion). NET recurrence was not detected in any of the patients. According to the WHO guidelines, the tumors were classified as grade (G)1 (n=8), G2 (n=3) and G1/G2 (n=1). The tumor in the patient with lymph node metastasis was G1. NETs sized <10 mm may be curatively treated by endoscopic resection. However, NETs with either lymphovascular invasion or sized >1 cm carry a risk for metastasis equivalent to that of adenocarcinomas. Therefore, it is mandatory to histologically examine lymphovascular invasion in specimens retrieved via endoscopic resection to determine the necessity for further radical surgery with regional lymph node dissection. The treatment of NETs sized <20 mm as presently defined in the WHO 2010 guidelines requires further evaluation.
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.