ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2022
[Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy: how certain is radiology?]
Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can Radiomics Predict Pathologic Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic-Accuracy Studies.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
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
The concept of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) means a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. In cases in which the TNT induced a complete clinical response (cCR), an organ preserving watch and wait therapy concept can now be provided more often; however, this increases the demand for imaging for the determination of cCR and in the subsequent follow-up. In this article, the performance of radiology in these scenarios will be evaluated and discussed. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the current standard for local assessment of the rectum with a high sensitivity for diagnosis and staging of rectal cancer, residual tumor and tumor recurrence. However, the certain exclusion of residual malignant tissue is still difficult, in particular the differentiation of residual scar tissue from vital residual tumor is only possible with low specificity and a moderate negative predictive value (NPV). The currently discussed criteria for the assessment of imaging have not yet been validated in large cohorts and are frequently subjective. An improvement of the diagnostic accuracy for identification of cCR in patients after TNT and for monitoring patients in watch and wait treatment concepts can certainly be achieved by the integration of MRI, endoscopy and endosonography as well as clinical parameters. This should enable for identification of patients with an incomplete response or local recurrence, in time for extended treatment to be initiated without relevant impact on the patient outcome.
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.