Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30790459›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2019

Poor prognostic and staging value of tumor deposit in locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Yaqi Wang, Jing Zhang, Menglong Zhou, Lifeng Yang, Juefeng Wan, Lijun Shen, Liping Liang, Ye Yao, Hui Zhang, Zhen Zhang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Yaqi WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8003-6251
Jing ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Menglong ZhouDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Lifeng YangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Juefeng WanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Lijun ShenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Liping LiangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Ye YaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Hui ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.
Zhen ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor deposit (TD) was associated with poor survival in colorectal cancer. However, its prognostic and staging value in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neo-CRT) is controversial. Four hundred and ninety-five LARC patients following neo-CRT and surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression in all lymph node (LN) -negative and LN-positive patients. Next, we used three methods to classify the counts of LNs and TDs (oN, only LN counts; n1N, counts according to the N1c standards; n2N, total counts of LNs and TDs) to evaluate the impact of TD on N staging. TD-positive patients were associated with more aggressive clinicopathological features. In multivariate analyses, TD was an independent poor prognostic factor of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence-free survival in all patients. In LN-negative patients, TD was an independent poor prognostic factor of OS, DFS and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). In LN-positive patients, TD has poor prognostic value only in patients with one positive LN. Three multivariate analyses according to three N staging methods showed that oN was not an independent prognostic factor, whereas n1N and n2N were independently associated with poor survival in OS, DFS and DMFS. The n2N method seemed to be better than n1N method. TD is an independent poor prognostic factor in LARC patients following neo-CRT, especially in patients with no more than one positive LN. TD probably should be considered as one positive LN when performing N staging.

Indexed as

Chemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantDigestive System Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMultivariate AnalysisNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRectal NeoplasmsSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcomelocally advanced rectal cancerneoadjuvant chemoradiotherapyprognosisstagingtumor deposit

Identifiers

PMID30790459
PMCPMC6488131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.