ArticleTranslational cancer research2020
Primary tumor resection and lymph node dissection improve survival in
Article in Translational cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is there a chance for curative treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma? A systematic review with meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy with lymph node dissection in pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinoma; a retrospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary tumor resection (PTR) and lymph node dissection (LND) may be performed occasionally in patients with
methodsPatients with
resultsA total of 10,036 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 275 (2.7%) underwent PTR, while 217 (2.2%) also underwent LND with a median of 16 nodes removed. In the IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median OS was 13 versus 6 months (P<0.001) for the PTR and non-PTR groups, respectively, and 15 versus 5 months (P=0.007) for the LND and non-LND groups, respectively. In the IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analysis, PTR was independently associated with better OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.483, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.468-0.498, P<0.001], as was LND (HR 0.286, 95% CI: 0.228-0.358, P<0.001). Similar results were observed in the analysis of CSS. In the LND group, the extent of LND was not associated with either OS or CSS.
conclusionsPTR and LND were independent prognostic factors that prolonged OS and CSS in de novo mPDAC patients. These findings must be validated in prospective randomized studies.
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.