Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37215849›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Clinical atlas of rectal cancer highlights the barriers and insufficient interventions underlying the unfavorable outcomes in older patients.

Zhuoyang Zhao, Jinxin Lin, Shunlun Chen, Xiaolin Wang, Heng Wang, Gaopo Xu, Jianru Wang, Ruwen Zhou, Zenghong Huang, Yingjie Li and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

16 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Zhuoyang ZhaoDepartment of Spine Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Jinxin LinDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Shunlun ChenDepartment of Spine Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Xiaolin WangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Heng WangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Gaopo XuGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Jianru WangDepartment of Spine Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Ruwen ZhouDepartment of Biostatistics, the Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, 10032, United States.
Zenghong HuangDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Yingjie LiGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Yu ZhangGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Xiaoxia LiuGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Puning WangDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Meijin HuangDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Yanxin LuoDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Huichuan YuDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510655, China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNColumbia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Aging confers an increased risk of developing cancer, and the global burden of cancer is cumulating as human longevity increases. Providing adequate care for old patients with rectal cancer is challenging and complex. Method: A total of 428 and 44,788 patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer from a referral tertiary care center (SYSU cohort) and the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database (SEER cohort) were included. Patients were categorized into old (over 65 years) and young (aged 50-65 years) groups. An age-specific clinical atlas of rectal cancer was generated, including the demographic and clinicopathological features, molecular profiles, treatment strategies, and clinical outcomes. Results: Old and young patients were similar in clinicopathological risk factors and molecular features, including TNM stage, tumor location, tumor differentiation, tumor morphology, lymphovascular invasion, and perineural invasion. However, old patients had significantly worse nutritional status and more comorbidities than young patients. In addition, old age was independently associated with less systemic cancer treatment (adjusted odds ratio 0.294 [95% CI 0.184-0.463, P < 0.001]). We found that old patients had significantly worse overall survival (OS) outcomes in both SYSU (P < 0.001) and SEER (P < 0.001) cohorts. Moreover, the death and recurrence risk of old patients in the subgroup not receiving chemo/radiotherapy (P < 0.001 for OS, and P = 0.046 for time to recurrence [TTR]) reverted into no significant risk in the subgroup receiving chemo/radiotherapy. Conclusions: Although old patients had similar tumor features to young patients, they had unfavorable survival outcomes associated with insufficient cancer care from old age. Specific trials with comprehensive geriatric assessment for old patients are needed to identify the optimal treatment regimens and improve unmet cancer care. Study registration: The study was registered on the research registry with the identifier of researchregistry 7635.

Indexed as

AgingCancer careComorbidityNutritionOld patientsRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID37215849
PMCPMC10196521
OpenAlexW4372218051

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.