Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37750870›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of radiology2023

Sense and non-sense of imaging in the era of organ preservation for rectal cancer.

Xinde Ou, Denise J van der Reijd, Doenja Mj Lambregts, Brechtje A Grotenhuis, Baukelien van Triest, Geerard L Beets, Regina Gh Beets-Tan, Monique Maas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Xinde OuDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Denise J van der ReijdDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Doenja Mj LambregtsDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Brechtje A GrotenhuisDepartment of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Baukelien van TriestDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Geerard L BeetsGROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Regina Gh Beets-TanDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Monique MaasDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review summarizes the current applications and benefits of imaging modalities for organ preservation in the treatment of rectal cancer. The concept of organ preservation in the treatment of rectal cancer has revolutionized the way rectal cancer is managed. Initially, organ preservation was limited to patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who needed neoadjuvant therapy to reduce tumor size before surgery and achieved complete response. However, neoadjuvant therapy is now increasingly utilized for smaller and less aggressive tumors to achieve primary organ preservation. Additionally, more intensive neoadjuvant strategies are employed to improve complete response rates and increase the chances of successful organ preservation. The selection of patients for organ preservation is a critical component of treatment, and imaging techniques such as digital rectal exam, endoscopy, and MRI are commonly used for this purpose. In this review, we provide an overview of what imaging modalities should be chosen and how they can aid in the selection and follow-up of patients undergoing organ-preserving strategies.

Indexed as

Organ PreservationRectal NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID37750870
PMCPMC10607404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.