ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2023
Effects of prior endoscopic resection on recurrence in patients with T1 colorectal cancer who underwent radical surgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2023. 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.
- Construction of diagnostic models with machine-learning algorithms for colorectal cancer based on clinical laboratory parameters.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Approaches and considerations in the endoscopic treatment of T1 colorectal cancer.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024Review
- Completion Surgery after Non-Curative Local Resection of Early Rectal Cancer.Visceral medicine · 2024Review
- Endoscopic resectionTranslational cancer research · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEndoscopic resection (ER) is a reliable treatment for early colorectal cancer without lymph node metastasis. We aimed to examine the effects of ER performed prior to T1 colorectal cancer (T1 CRC) surgery by comparing long-term survival after radical surgery with prior ER to that after radical surgery alone.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients who underwent surgical resection of T1 CRC at the National Cancer Center, Korea, between 2003 and 2017. All eligible patients (n = 543) were divided into primary and secondary surgery groups. To ensure similar characteristics between the groups, 1:1 propensity score matching was used. Baseline characteristics, gross and histological features, along with postoperative recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the two groups were compared. Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify the risk factors affecting recurrence after surgery. Cost analysis was performed to examine the cost-effectiveness of ER and radical surgeries.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in 5-year RFS between the two groups in matched data (96.9% vs. 95.5%, p = 0.596) and in the unadjusted model (97.2% vs. 96.8%, p = 0.930). This difference was also similar in subgroup analyses based on node status and high-risk histologic features. ER before surgery did not increase the medical costs of radical surgery.
conclusionER prior to radical surgery did not affect the long-term oncologic outcomes of T1 CRC or significantly increased the medical costs. Attempting ER first for suspected T1 CRC would be a good strategy to avoid unnecessary surgery without concerns of worsening cancer-related prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37300565What 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.