ReviewCurrent colorectal cancer reports2018
Watch-and-Wait as a Therapeutic Strategy in Rectal Cancer.
Review in Current colorectal cancer reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06940388 (Total Neoadjuvant Treatment With or Without Tislelizumab for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 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.
Total Neoadjuvant Treatment With or Without Tislelizumab for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: An Open-label Randomized Controlled Phase II Study (The TOTAL Trial)
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neoadjuvant Modified FOLFOX6 With or Without Radiation Versus Fluorouracil Plus Radiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Final Results of the Chinese FOWARC Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Trial
- Photoacoustic-ultrasound endoscopy for assessment of rectal cancer treatment response: A prospective study with T2-weighted MRI radiomics comparison.Photoacoustics · 2026Article
- Watch-and-wait in rectal cancer: A critical appraisal of promise, perils and unresolved contours of organ preservation (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- Overcoming the Challenge: A Comprehensive Review of Neoadjuvant Treatment Resistance in Rectal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Review
- Optical diagnostics of liver tumors using an autofluorescence lifetime probe.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- Role of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Remodeling Surgical Approaches for Gastrointestinal Malignancies.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- The Ongoing Development of Watch and Wait.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Certainty in Characterizing Liver Lesions in Rectal Cancer: Abbreviated Liver MRI versus CT.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Dealing with rectum motion during radiotherapy: How can we anticipate it?Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Correlations between Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) and Prognosis in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endoscopic submucosal dissectionWorld journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Enhancing clinical complete response assessment in rectal cancer: integrating transanal multipoint full-layer puncture biopsy criteria: a systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- How Can We Improve the Tumor Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer?Ewha medical journal · 2023Review
- Data-Independent Acquisition Mass Spectrometry Analysis of FFPE Rectal Cancer Samples Offers In-Depth Proteomics Characterization of the Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2023.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Review
- Quantitative analysis of diffusion weighted imaging in rectal cancer during radiotherapy using a magnetic resonance imaging integrated linear accelerator.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
- The frequency of assessment of progression in randomized oncology clinical trials.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Prognostic Factors and Treatment of Recurrence after Local Excision of Rectal Cancer.Yonsei medical journal · 2021Observational
- Evaluation and Predictive Factors of Complete Response in Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewPathological complete response is seen in approximately one fifth of rectal cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Since these patients have excellent oncological outcomes, there has been a rapidly growing interest in organ preservation for those who develop a clinical complete response. We review the watch-and-wait strategy and focus on all aspects of this hot topic, including who should be considered for this approach, how should we identify treatment response and what are the expected outcomes. RECENT
findingsThe major challenges in interpreting the data on watch-and-wait are the significant heterogeneity of patients selected for this approach and of methods employed to identify them. The evidence available comes mostly from retrospective cohort studies, but has shown good oncological outcomes, including the rate of successful salvage surgery, locoregional control and overall survival. SUMMARY: There is currently not enough and not robust enough evidence to support watch-and-wait as a standard approach, outside a clinical trial, for patients achieving clinical complete response following neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Furthermore, there is a lack of data on long-term outcomes. However, the results we have so far are promising, and there is therefore an urgent need for randomised control studies such as the TRIGGER trial to confirm the safety of this 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.