ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Endoscopic and surgical treatment of T1N0M0 colorectal neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based comparative study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epidemiological trends and novel prognostic evaluation approaches of patients with stage II-IV colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: A population-based study with external validation.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Trial
- Development and internal validation of a SEER-based prediction model for survival in poorly and undifferentiated colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Risk factors, prognostic factors and nomograms for distant metastasis in colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms: a SEER-based study.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes between solitary and multiple rectal neuroendocrine tumors: a propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Endoscopic therapy versus surgical resection for elderly patients with colorectal neuroendocrine tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Comparing surgical and endoscopic resection approaches for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors within the diameter range of 10-20mm: an inverse probability weighting analysis based on the SEER database.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Effect of refined management in operating room nursing on surgical efficiency and nursing satisfaction during laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Clinicopathological characteristics of rectal multiple neuroendocrine neoplasms and literature review.BMC surgery · 2023Review
- Tumor Differentiation is the Dominant Prognostic Factor for Patients with Colorectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms with Distant Metastasis.International journal of endocrinology · 2022Article
- Tumor Macroscopic Morphology Is an Important Prognostic Factor in Predicting Chemotherapeutic Efficacy and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Colorectal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms, One Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the rapid advances in endoscopic technology, endoscopic therapy (ET) is increasingly applied to the treatment of small (≤ 20 mm) colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). However, long-term data comparing ET and surgery for management of T1N0M0 colorectal NETs are lacking. The purpose of this work was to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of such patients with ET or surgery.
methodsPatients with T1N0M0 colorectal NETs were identified within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2016). Demographics, tumor characteristics, therapeutic methods, and survival were compared. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used 1:3 and among this cohort, Cox proportional hazards regression models were performed to evaluate correlation between treatment and outcomes.
resultsOf 4487 patients with T1N0M0 colorectal NETs, 1125 were identified in the matched cohort, among whom 819 (72.8%) underwent ET and 306 (27.2%) underwent surgery. There was no difference in the 5-year and 10-year OS and CSS rates between the 2 treatment modalities. Likewise, analyses stratified by tumor size and site showed that patients did not benefit more from surgery compared with ET. Moreover, multivariate analyses found no significant differences in OS [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.857, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.513-1.431, P = 0.555] and CSS (HR = 0.925, 95% CI: 0.282-3.040, P = 0.898) between the 2 groups. Similar results were observed when comparisons were limited to patients with different tumor size and site.
conclusionsIn this population-based study, patients with lesions < 10 mm treated endoscopically had comparable long-term survival compared with those treated surgically, which demonstrates ET as an alternative to surgery in T1N0M0 colorectal NETs of < 10 mm. Further high-quality prospective studies are warranted to comprehensively evaluate the role of ET in patients with tumors 10 to 20 mm.
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.