Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35712999›Full record

Observational studyAsia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology2023

A prospective study of diagnostic accuracy of multidisciplinary team and radiology reporting of preoperative colorectal cancer local staging.

Sergei Bedrikovetski, Nagendra N Dudi-Venkata, Hidde M Kroon, Luke H Traeger, Warren Seow, Ryash Vather, Michael Wilks, James W Moore, Tarik Sammour

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sergei BedrikovetskiDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9330-625X
Nagendra N Dudi-VenkataDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Hidde M KroonDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Luke H TraegerDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Warren SeowDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ryash VatherColorectal Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Michael WilksDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
James W MooreDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Tarik SammourDiscipline of Surgery, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of this study was to correlate and assess diagnostic accuracy of preoperative staging at multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT) against the original radiology reports and pathological staging in colorectal cancer patients.

methodsA prospective observational study was conducted at two institutions. Patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer and available preoperative imaging were included. Preoperative tumor and nodal staging (cT and cN) as determined by the MDT and the radiology report (computed tomography [CT] and/or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) were recorded. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between MDT and the radiology report for cN staging in colon cancer, cT and cN in rectal cancer, and tumor regression grade (TRG) in patients with rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy. Pathological report after surgery served as the reference standard for local staging, and AUROC curves were constructed to compare diagnostic accuracy of the MDT and radiology report.

resultsA total of 481 patients were included. Agreement between MDT and radiology report for cN stage was good in colon cancer (k = .756, Confidence Interval (CI) 95% .686-.826). Agreement for cT and cN and in rectal cancer was very good (kw = .825, CI 95% .758-.892) and good (kw = .792, CI 95% .709-.875), respectively. In the rectal cancer group that received neoadjuvant therapy, agreement on TRG was very good (kw = .919, CI 95% .846-.993). AUROC curves using pathological staging indicated no difference in diagnostic accuracy between MDT and radiology reports for either colon or rectal cancer.

conclusionPreoperative colorectal cancer local staging was consistent between specialist MDT review and original radiology reports, with no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy identified.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsRadiologyRectal NeoplasmsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm StagingPatient Care TeamProspective Studiescolorectal cancermultidisciplinary teamspreoperative N stagepreoperative T stageradiology

Identifiers

PMID35712999
PMCPMC10084150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.