Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34140428›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2022

Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Prognosis in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Min Sung Yoon, Hee Seung Lee, Chang Moo Kang, Woo Jung Lee, Jiyoung Keum, Min Je Sung, Seung-Seob Kim, Mi-Suk Park, Jung Hyun Jo, Moon Jae Chung and 5 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Comparison of postoperative survival after neoadjuvant treatmentAnnals of surgical treatment and research · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Min Sung YoonDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4513-4948
Hee Seung LeeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2825-3160
Chang Moo KangDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5382-4658
Woo Jung LeeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9273-261X
Jiyoung KeumDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7061-6183
Min Je SungDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5395-8851
Seung-Seob KimDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6071-306X
Mi-Suk ParkDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5817-2444
Jung Hyun JoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2641-8873
Moon Jae ChungDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5920-8549
Jeong Youp ParkDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0110-8606
Seung Woo ParkDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8230-964X
Si Young SongDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1417-4314
Ho Kyoung HwangDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4064-7776
Seungmin BangDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5209-8351
Yonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aims: Controversy regarding the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) still exists. Here, we aimed to identify the potential benefits of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery for resectable PDAC.

methodsWe reviewed radiologically resectable PDAC patients who received resection with curative intent at a tertiary hospital in South Korea between January 2012 and August 2019. A total of 202 patients underwent curative resection for resectable PDAC: 167 underwent surgical resection first during this period, and 35 received neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation therapy followed by surgery. Resectable PDAC patients were subdivided, and 1:3 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias.

resultsCompared with the group that received surgery first, the group that received neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery had significantly smaller tumors (22.0 mm vs 27.0 mm, p=0.004), a smaller proportion of patients with postoperative pathologic T stage (p=0.026), a smaller proportion of patients with lymphovascular invasion (20.0% vs 40.7%, p=0.022), and a larger proportion of patients with negative resection margins (74.3% vs 51.5%, p=0.049). After PSM, the group that received neoadjuvant therapy had a significantly longer progression-free survival than those in the group that underwent surgery first (29.6 months vs 15.1 months, p=0.002). Overall survival was not significantly different between the two groups after PSM analysis.

conclusionsWe observed significantly better surgical outcomes and progression-free survival with the addition of neoadjuvant therapy to the management of resectable PDAC. However, despite PSM, there was still selection bias due to the use of different regimens between the groups receiving surgery first and neoadjuvant therapy. Large homogeneous samples are needed in the future prospective studies.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalPancreatic NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyPancreatectomyPrognosisPropensity ScoreNeoadjuvant therapyPancreatic neoplasmProgression-free survivalSurgical outcome

Identifiers

PMID34140428
PMCPMC8761915
OpenAlexW3167469906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.