ArticlePloS one2019
What factors are associated with the poor prognosis of anal adenocarcinoma compared with low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma based on a population analysis: A propensity score matching study.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05605873 (Clinical, Histological and Prognostic Forms of Adenocarcinoma of the Anus), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Clinical, Histological and Prognostic Forms of Adenocarcinoma of the Anus
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anal canal neoplasms in the modern era: integrating HPV biology, LAST terminology, and evolving molecular classification.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Review
- Prognosis of anal canal adenocarcinoma versus lower rectal adenocarcinoma in Japan: a propensity score matching study.Surgery today · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnal adenocarcinoma (AA) represents a rare condition, and little is known about the predictive factors of the outcomes or the optimal TNM staging system for curable AA. Using population-based data, we preliminarily sought to determine the prognostic factors and evaluate the existing T and N staging criteria of AA.
methodsWe analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 database to identify patients 20-80 years old who were diagnosed with AA or rectal adenocarcinoma (RA) and underwent abdominal perineal resection between 2004 and 2012. The difference between Kaplan-Meier survival curves was estimated by a log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to adjust the effects of other covariates on survival in the propensity score-matched cohort, including age, gender, race, marital status, histology, grade of differentiation, tumor size, number of positive lymph nodes, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy.
resultsCompared to patients with RA, patients with AA had a worse CSS after controlling for other covariates (hazard ratio [HR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-3.07; P<0.01). For AA, the increasing tumor size (2-5 cm: HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.29-1.32; P>0.05; >5 cm: HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.49-2.07; P>0.05) had no significant influence on survival. The number of positive lymph nodes (1-3: HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.55-5.53; P<0.01; ≥4: HR, 4.24; 95% CI, 2.08-8.62; P<0.01) significantly influenced survival.
conclusionsAA confers a worse prognosis than RA does. The T staging criteria of anal carcinoma, dominated by tumor size, seem to be invalid for AA, while the number of positive lymph nodes is a prognostic factor.
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.