ArticleSurgery2019
Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by transanal local excision for T2 rectal cancer confers equivalent survival benefit as traditional transabdominal resection.
Article in Surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Towards personalized treatment of T2N0 rectal cancer: A systematic review of long-term oncological outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy followed by local excision.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of adequate lymph nodes dissection on survival in patients with stage I rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Local excision and chemoradiation for clinical node-negative anal adenocarcinoma.Surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Survival analysis of local excision vs total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer in pT1/pT2 stage and intermediate pathological risk.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Article
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
Abstract
backgroundDespite clinical guidelines classifying T2 rectal cancer as a contraindication for transanal local excision attributable to unacceptably high rates of local recurrence, it is a practice that persists clinically. Recent clinical trials have suggested that transanal local excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation is an acceptable alternative in select patients.
methodsThe 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgical intervention. Patients were stratified by treatment with transabdominal resection or transanal local excision, both with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Propensity matching was performed, and, using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models, survival was compared between the groups.
resultsA total of 12,021 patients met inclusion criteria, including 1,761 and 6,629 patients who underwent transabdominal resection with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively, and 695 and 2,936 patients who underwent local transanal excision with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively. In unadjusted analysis, patients undergoing induction therapy followed by transabdominal resection or local excision had equivalent survival. Similarly, on multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression after propensity matching, local excision was not an independent predictor of patient mortality compared with transabdominal resection (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.16).
conclusionLocal transanal excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation may provide comparable survival benefit to transabdominal resection for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal cancer. Therefore, patients who refuse or are poor candidates for transabdominal resection should be considered for neoadjuvant therapy followed by transanal local excision.
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.