Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35758193›Full record

SynthesisHistopathology2022

Microsatellite instability in rectal cancer: what does it mean? A study of two randomized trials and a systematic review of the literature.

Marloes Swets, Cristina Graham Martinez, Shannon van Vliet, Arjan van Tilburg, Hans Gelderblom, Corrie A M Marijnen, Cornelis J H van de Velde, Iris D Nagtegaal

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Histopathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Study on predicting microsatellite instability in rectal cancer using TCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Marloes Swets *Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Cristina Graham Martinez *Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1186-4053
Shannon van VlietDepartment of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Arjan van TilburgDepartment of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Hans GelderblomDepartment of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Corrie A M MarijnenDepartment of Radiotherapy, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Cornelis J H van de VeldeDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Iris D NagtegaalDepartment of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0887-4127
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLLeiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding KWF UL 2013-6311
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimCurrently, compelling evidence illustrates the significance of determining microsatellite instability (MSI) in colorectal cancer (CRC). The association of MSI with proximal CRC is well established, however, its implications in patients with rectal cancer remain undefined. We therefore aimed to determine the role of MSI with respect to incidence and outcome in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS AND

resultsFor this we examined patients from two prospective phase III trials: TME trial and PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial (n = 1250). In addition, we performed a literature review to evaluate the overall prevalence, the effect on survival and the response to neo-adjuvant treatment in patients with MSI rectal cancer compared with microsatellite stable (MSS) rectal cancer. Our TME and PROCTOR-SCRIPT cohort showed no differences in terms of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.47) and disease-free survival (DFS) (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68-1.45) in patients with MSI compared to MSS rectal cancer. The total number of MSI cases in all included studies (including our own) was 1220 (out of 16,526 rectal cancer patients), with an overall prevalence of 6.7% (standard error 1.19%). Both for OS as for DFS there was no impact of MSI status on prognosis (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.77-1.29 and HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60-1.22, respectively). The risk ratio (RR) for downstaging and pathological complete response showed also no impact of MSI status (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86-1.55 and RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54-1.22, respectively).

conclusionRectal cancer patients with MSI form a distinct and rare subcategory, however, there is no prognostic effect of MSI in rectal cancer patients.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsRectal NeoplasmsHumansMicrosatellite InstabilityNeoplasm StagingPrognosisProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicmicrosatellite instabilityprognosisrectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID35758193
PMCPMC9541309
OpenAlexW4283578259

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.