ArticleMedicine2019
Endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging-based prediction of ypT stage in patients with rectal cancer who received chemoradiotherapy: Results from a prospective study of 110 patients.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Committee Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Guideline
- Pooled it
- Endoscopic assessment of rectal cancer response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A narrative literature review.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Predictors of pathologic complete response in patients with residual flat mucosal lesions after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2022Article
- Does restaging MRI radiomics analysis improve pathological complete response prediction in rectal cancer patients? A prognostic model development.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- Circulating Hybrid Cells: A Novel Liquid Biomarker of Treatment Response in Gastrointestinal Cancers.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Contemporary snapshot of tumor regression grade (TRG) distribution in locally advanced rectal cancer: a cross sectional multicentric experience.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Can Rectal Cancer Patients with Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Avoid Surgery?Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate tumor response determination remains inconclusive after preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for rectal cancer. This study aimed to investigate whether clinical assessment, such as endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), can accurately predict ypT stage and select candidates for pelvic organ-preserving surgery in rectal cancer after preoperative CRT. A total of 110 patients who underwent preoperative CRT followed by curative resection for rectal cancer were prospectively enrolled. Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (mrTRG) using T2-MRI, endoscopic evaluation, and combination modality (combination of endoscopy and mrTRG) were used to analyze tumor response after preoperative CRT. Endoscopic findings were categorized as 3 grades and the mrTRG was assessed into 5 grades. Twenty-nine patients (26.4%) had achieved pathologic complete response. When predicting ypT0, endoscopy showed significantly higher area under the curve (AUC 0.818) than did mrTRG (AUC 0.568) and combination modality (AUC 0.768) in differentiating good response from poor response (P < .001). Both endoscopy and combination modality showed significantly higher diagnostic performance in sensitivity (79.31%), positive predictive value (PPV 67.65%), negative predictive value (NPV 92.11%), and accuracy (84.55%) than those of MR tumor response (sensitivity 37.93%, PPV 36.67%, NPV 77.50%, and accuracy 66.36%) for the prediction of ypT0 (P < .001). Combination modality showed significantly higher diagnostic performance in sensitivity (56.92%), NPV (56.92%), and accuracy (67.27%) compared with those of mrTRG. Neither endoscopy, nor mrTRG, nor the combination modality had adequate diagnostic performances to be clinically acceptable in selecting candidates for nonoperative treatment strategies. However, endoscopy may be incorporated in clinical restaging strategy in planning the extent of surgical resection in patients with rectal cancer.
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.