Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31192245›Full record

ReviewVisceral medicine2019

Watchful Waiting after Radiochemotherapy in Rectal Cancer: When Is It Feasible?

Cihan Gani, Andreas Kirschniak, Daniel Zips

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Visceral medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cihan GaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Andreas KirschniakDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Daniel ZipsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
University Children's Hospital Tübingen · DEGerman Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A "watch and wait" strategy in rectal cancer is increasingly considered in patients who achieve an excellent response to radiotherapy. While a growing number of studies have shown the feasibility of this strategy in selected patients, the optimal therapeutic regimen to maximize response rates still needs to be established. Furthermore, accurate response prediction and the management of minor residual findings after radiotherapy remain a matter of debate. Finally, concerns regarding the long-term oncological safety of the "watch and wait" approach have been expressed. Therefore, the present review aims to address the open questions in the context of a "watch and wait" strategy and focuses on the diagnosis of a clinical complete response and the ideal management thereafter.

Indexed as

CancerComplete responseOrgan preservationRadiotherapyRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID31192245
PMCPMC6514498
OpenAlexW2925271036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.