ReviewAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2021
Paradigm shift for defining the resectability of pancreatic cancer.
Review in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Surgery for Oligometastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Defining Biologic Resectability.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Review
- A critical review of pancreatectomy with concomitant superior mesenteric artery resection and intestinal autotransplantation.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2023Article
- Prognostic value of circulating proteins in patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Pancreatectomy with concomitant portal vein resection in the current neoadjuvant era.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Supported by the expanding indications for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC), the concept of resectability has evolved from being mostly based on the anatomical tumor extent to considering the biological and conditional factors relevant to prognosis. Therefore, it is more reasonable to define the "criteria for surgical resection" instead of using the "(technical) resectability criteria." NAT has been used in resectable PCs (RPC) with a high risk of early systemic recurrence, as predicted by various biological or anatomical markers. Moreover, the indications for NAT followed by conversion surgery or adjuvant surgery for borderline resectable or locally advanced PC (LAPC) are gradually expanding. Therefore, it is important to define the RPC group that will benefit from NAT and the LAPC group that will benefit from post-NAT surgery. At diagnosis, population-based approaches, such as prognostic stratification and staging systems and personalized outcome-based approaches using prognostic prediction models can be used to determine the criteria for treatment options. Standardized indications for conversion surgery are needed for patients who are initially treated with NAT. In addition to imaging-based morphological criteria, biological criteria, including CA19-9, and various metabolic criteria can be used to establish predicted outcome-based criteria. Multicenter collaboration is required to develop a large database with standardized data collection for various biomarkers and response data after NAT to establish more accurate outcome prediction models to define the new resectability criteria.
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.