ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2022
A multicentre cohort study assessing the utility of routine blood tests as adjuncts to identify complete responders in rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2022. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Development and validation of a gradient boosting machine-based model for predicting tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte proportions in breast cancer.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of Nomogram Models Incorporating the Inflammatory Nutritional Index CALLY for Predicting Survival in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- A management of patients achieving clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy and perspectives: on locally advanced rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Clinical Significance of Preoperative Hematological Parameters in Patients with D2-Resected, Node-Positive Stomach Cancer.Biomedicines · 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
1 author at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeManagement of rectal cancer with a complete clinical response (cCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) is controversial. Some advocate "watch and wait" programmes and organ-preserving surgery. Central to these strategies is the ability to accurately preoperatively distinguish cCR from residual disease (RD). We sought to identify if post-NACRT (preoperative) inflammatory markers act as an adjunct to MRI and endoscopy findings for distinguishing cCR from RD in rectal cancer.
methodsPatients from three specialist rectal cancer centres were screened for inclusion (2010-2015). For inclusion, patients were required to have completed NACRT, had a post-NACRT MRI (to assess mrTRG) and proceeded to total mesorectal excision (TME). Endoluminal response was assessed on endoscopy at 6-8 weeks post-NACRT. Pathological response to therapy was calculated using a three-point tumour regression grade system (TRG1-3). Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), serum albumin (SAL), CEA and CA19-9 levels post-NACRT (preoperatively) were recorded. Variables were compared between those who had RD on post-operative pathology and those with ypCR. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (version 21).
resultsSix hundred forty-six patients were screened, of which 422 were suitable for inclusion. A cCR rate of 25.5% (n = 123) was observed. Sixty patients who achieved cCR were excluded from final analysis as they underwent organ-preserving surgery (local excision) leaving 63 ypCR patients compared to 359 with RD. On multivariate analysis, combining cCR on MRI and endoscopy with NLR < 5 demonstrated the greatest odds of ypCR on final histological assessment [OR 6.503 (1.594-11.652]) p < 0.001]. This method had the best diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.962 95% CI 0.936-0.987), compared to MRI (AUC = 0.711 95% CI 0.650-0.773) or endoscopy (AUC = 0.857 95% CI 0.811-0.902) alone or used together (AUC = 0.926 95% CI 0.892-0.961).
conclusionCombining post-NACRT inflammatory markers with restaging MRI and endoscopy findings adds another avenue to aid distinguishing RD from cCR in rectal cancer.
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.