SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2022
Efficacy and safety of the "watch-and-wait" approach for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07580027 (Preoperative, Adaptive Radiotherapy Concomitant to Chemotherapy for Rectal Adenocarcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Preoperative, Adaptive Radiotherapy Concomitant to Chemotherapy for Rectal Adenocarcinoma (Adaptive Rectal Cancer Trial 02). An Interventional Study.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut-Microbiome Signatures Predicting Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.Metabolites · 2025Review
- Exploring the correlation between Tom1L1 and the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally progressive mid-low rectal cancer.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Advancing Personalized Medicine in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A management of patients achieving clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy and perspectives: on locally advanced rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Local resection versus radical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: a propensity-score matched cohort analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided injection of carbon nanoparticles suspension to label rectal cancer before neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective cohort study.Gastroenterology report · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWatch-and-Wait (WW) approach is positioned at the cutting edge of non-invasive approach for rectal cancer patients who achieve clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical, oncologic, and survival outcomes of WW versus radical surgery (RS) and to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and possible superiority of WW.
methodsA systematic search for studies comparing WW with RS was conducted on MEDLINE, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. After screening for inclusion, data extraction, and quality assessment, statistical analysis was performed using Stata/SE14.0 software. Permanent colostomy (PC), local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), cancer-related death (CRD), 2-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using fixed effects or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity.
resultsFourteen studies with moderate-high quality involving 1254 patients were included. Of these, 513 patients were managed with WW and 741 patients were subjected to RS. Compared to RS group, WW group had higher rate of LR (odds ratio OR = 11.09, 95% confidence interval CI = 5.30-23.20, P = 0.000), 2-year OS, and 3-year OS and had lower rate of PC (OR = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.05-0.29, P = 0.000). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to DM, CRD, 2-, 3-, and 5-year DFS (OR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.81-1.03, P = 0.153), or 5-year OS (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.28-3.63, P = 0.988).
conclusionThe WW is a promising treatment approach and is a relatively safe alternative to RS for managing patients with rectal cancer who achieve cCR after nCRT. However, this modality requires rigorous screening criteria and standardized follow-up. Large-scale, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted to further verify the outcomes of WW approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34981233What 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.