ArticleMedicine2019
Optimal interval to surgery after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Oncological Outcomes and Risk Factors for Local Recurrence and Distant Metastasis After Upfront Surgery in cT3 Rectal Cancer With an Uninvolved Circumferential Resection Margin on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the Western world. Preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) has been widely performed in the treatment of rectal cancer patients. However, there is no consensus on the length of waiting interval between the end of preoperative nCRT and surgery. Present network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare the differences of effect between all available interval to surgery after nCRT in rectal cancer in improving overall survival, disease-free survival and pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, and to rate the certainty of evidence from present NMA.
methodWe will systematically search PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases to identify studies assessing the interval to surgery after CRT in rectal cancer. We will conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis using Bayesian method and report the full-text according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension Vision statement (PRISMA-NMA). We will assess the risk of bias of individual study using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Handbook V.5.1.0. We will also use the advance of GRADE to rate the certainty of NMA. Data will be analyzed by using R software V.3.4.1.
resultsThe results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
conclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this systematic review and NMA will first use both direct and indirect evidence to compare the differences of all available interval to surgery after CRT in rectal cancer. This is a protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis, so the ethical approval and patient consent are not required.
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.