SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2020
Efficacy and safety of wait and see strategy versus radical surgery and local excision for rectal cancer with cCR response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in World 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 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, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of the "watch-and-wait" approach for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of the watch-and-wait strategy versus total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer exhibiting complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Predictive value of flexible proctosigmoidoscopy and laboratory findings for complete clinical responses after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
- Survival outcomes of salvage surgery in the watch-and-wait approach for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of coloproctology · 2023Review
- Specific Septic Complications after Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Critical Multicentre Study.Cancers · 2023Article
- Review
- Efficacy of endoscopic surveillance in the detection of local recurrence after radical rectal cancer surgery is limited? A retrospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Predictive model estimating the decrease of postoperative gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) in patients after elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Observational
- Effect of mistletoe extract on tumor response in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a cohort study.World journal of surgical 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant therapy can shrink tumors, increase anus preservation rate, and protect anal function. Radical surgery need cut off the diseased bowel, clean up the lymph nodes, and then restore bowel function. It could bring traumatic effect and poor postoperative quality of life to the patient. Local resection requires removal of the diseased bowel with circular negative margin. The surgical trauma is small, and the postoperative quality of life is good. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety between wait and see strategy (WS), radical surgery (RS), and local excision (LE) of rectal cancer patients with clinical complete response (cCR) response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), and Wanfang databases to compare wait and see strategy with radical surgery and local excision for rectal cancer with cCR response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy up to March 2020. We collected the data of local recurrence, distant metastasis, cancer-related death, overall survival, and disease-free survival and used RevMan 5.0 to carry out the meta-analysis. Continuous data were evaluated by the standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), and dichotomous data were evaluated by relative risks (ORs or RRs) with 95% CIs. We aimed to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the three groups.
resultsEleven English studies with 1131 patients were included. There were 412 patients in WS group, 678 patients in RS group, and 41 patients in LE group. WS group had a higher local recurrence rate than RS group (OR 7.32, 95% CI 3.58 to 14.95, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the other data between the three groups.
conclusionCompared with the RS group, the WS group had an increased risk of local recurrence. However, the WS group had a similar DFS and OS compared with the RS group and the local excision group. Hence, we speculated that the WS group would have similar results as the surgery group for patients with cCR status.
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.