ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2022
The watch-and-wait strategy
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of clinical information on the treatment decisions for good responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy among rectal cancer patients.Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
- Impact of preoperative anemia on short- and long-term outcomes of sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Lymph node metastasis following chemoradiotherapy in advanced rectal cancer: ypT2-focused analyses of total mesorectal excision specimens.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of organ preservation attempt and radical surgery in clinical T2N0 mid to low rectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to oncologic outcomes of the watch-and-wait (WW) strategy compared with radical resection (RR). Methods: Patients with rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and achieved ≤ycT2 between 2008 and 2016 were included. The mean follow-up time was 61 months (range, 0-168 months). Recurrence-free survival (RFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared. A total of 446 patients were included, and WW was adopted for 34 patients. Results: WW patients were older (P = 0.022) and less advanced initial cT stage (P = 0.004). Ten patients in the WW group (29.4%) experienced local regrowth. Later, distant metastases occurred in 7 of these patients. The 5-year RFS (74.1% Conclusion: By appointing the WW strategy, oncologic safety was not ensured. The WW strategy must be implemented with caution in patients with ≤ycT2 stage, particularly those with advanced initial cT stage.
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.