ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2023
MRI in rectal cancer patients on 'watch and wait': patterns of response and their evolution.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls of MRI for restaging locally advanced rectal cancer in patients following anti-PD1 therapy plus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a multicenter study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Trial
- MRI's evolving role in rectal cancer in the era of personalized medicine.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- The role of superior hemorrhoidal vein ectasia in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 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
purposeEvaluate MR patterns of response and their evolution in rectal cancer patients on watch and wait (WW).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 337 MRIs of 60 patients (median follow-up: 12 months; range: 6-49 months). Baseline MRIs (available in 34/60 patients) were evaluated for tumor morphology, location, thickness, circumferential involvement, nodal status and EMVI. First post-treatment MRIs (in all patients) were additionally evaluated for pattern of response on T2 and DWI. Change in post-treatment scar thickness and scar depth angle between the first and second post-treatment scans was also evaluated. Evolution of the response pattern/recurrence were evaluated till the last available scan.
resultsOn the baseline scans, 20/34 (59%) patients had polypoidal tumor with 12/20 having ≤ 25% circumferential wall involvement. We saw five patterns of response-normalized rectal wall (2/60-3%), minimal fibrosis (23/60-38%), full thickness fibrosis (16/60-27%), irregular fibrosis (11/60-18%) and split scar (6/60-10%), with 2/60 (3%) showing possible residual disease. On the first post-treatment scans, 12/60 (20%) had restricted diffusion, with 3/12 having persistent restriction till last follow-up. Post-treatment fibrosis/split scar remained stable in 44/60 (73%) cases and improved further in the rest. 9/60 (15%) patients developed regrowth/recurrence. Patients with recurrence had < 10 mm scar thickness and < 21° change in scar angle between the first and second post-treatment MRIs.
conclusionMost patients on WW protocol developed minimal or full thickness fibrosis, majority of which remained stable on follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37450019What 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.