ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2020
Effect of understaging on local recurrence of rectal cancer.
Article in Journal of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of pelvimetry in predicting surgical outcomes and morbidity in rectal cancer surgery: A retrospective analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Abandonment of Routine Radiotherapy for Nonlocally Advanced Rectal Cancer and Oncological Outcomes.JAMA oncology · 2024Article
- The prognostic value of extramural venous invasion in preoperative MRI of rectal cancer patients.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022Article
- The assessment of risk factors for long-term survival outcome in ypN0 patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy and radical anterior resection.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Nomograms and risk score models for predicting survival in rectal cancer patients with neoadjuvant therapy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Effect of understaging on local recurrence of rectal cancer.Journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesMagnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis has a limited accuracy to detect positive lymph nodes but does dictate neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer. This study aimed to investigate preoperative lymph node understaging and its effects on postoperative local recurrence rate.
methodsPatients were selected from a retrospective cross-sectional snapshot study. Patients with emergency surgery, cM1 disease, or unknown cN- or (y)pN category were excluded. Clinical and pathologic N-categories were compared and the impact on local recurrence was determined by multivariable analysis.
resultsOut of 1548 included patients, 233 had preoperatively underestimated lymph node staging based on (y)pN category. Out of the 695 patients staged cN0, 168 (24%) had positive lymph nodes at pathology, and out of the 594 patients staged cN1, 65 (11%) were (y)pN2. Overall 3-year local recurrence rate was 5%. Clinical N-category was not associated with local recurrence when corrected for pT-category, neoadjuvant therapy, and resection margin, neither in patients with (y)pN1 (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-4.12) P = .263) nor (y)pN2-category (HR: 1.91 95% CI: [0.75-4.84], P = .175).
conclusionPreoperative understaging of nodal status in rectal cancer is not uncommon. No significant effect on local recurrence or overall survival rates were found in the present study.
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.