ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020
The Main Bottleneck for Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in Past Decades: A Population-Based Analysis.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The survival impact of palliative radiotherapy on synchronous metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: metastatic site can serve for radiotherapy-decision.Journal of Cancer · 2022Article
- A novel risk-scoring system conducing to chemotherapy decision for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreatectomy.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- The Survival Effect of Radiotherapy on Stage II/III Rectal Cancer in Different Age Groups: Formulating Radiotherapy Decision-Making Based on Age.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
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 at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite recent advancements in surgical techniques, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, the 5-year survival rate of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains an unsatisfactory ~8%. MATERIAL AND METHODS Data were extracted to identify patients with non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed in the periods 1988-1996 and 2010-2014 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The statistical analyses were performed with the log-rank test, Pearson's chi-square test, propensity score matching, and Cox regression model. RESULTS The hazard ratio (HR) of surgery was reduced from 0.454 to 0.302 in Cox regression modeling, and there was no overlapping about the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of surgery between the 2 periods. The HR values of radiotherapy, which were new prognostic factor for resectable PDAC in 2010-2014, were reduced in both the resectable and unresectable groups. The upgraded chemotherapy regimen reduced the HR values from 0.738 to 0.689 in all PADC patients, and from 0.656 to 0.588 in unresectable PDAC. The log-rank test results showed that advances in surgery significantly improved the median survival from 13 months to 32 months. Radiotherapeutic and chemotherapeutic advancements extended median survival by 12 months and 11 months, respectively, in resectable PDAC. The median survivals were extended by 3 months for both of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in unresectable PDAC. CONCLUSIONS The development of chemotherapy and radiotherapy has been slow, especially for unresectable PDAC. Although advances in surgery contributed significantly to improved survival for resectable PDAC, lack of early diagnostic tools, which lead to low resection rates, remain a barrier for all PDAC patients.
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.