Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37772467›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

The patient's perspective on radiation for rectal cancer: Initial expectations versus actual experience.

Basil H Chaballout, Eric M Chang, Narek Shaverdian, Percy P Lee, Phillip J Beron, Michael L Steinberg, Ann C Raldow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Total neoadjuvant therapy in early-onset rectal cancer: A multicentre prospective cohort study.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Basil H ChaballoutUniversity of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4481-7958
Eric M ChangOregon Health and Science University School of Medicine, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Narek ShaverdianMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0294-8749
Percy P LeeUCLA Department of Radiation Oncology, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Phillip J BeronCancer Treatment Centers of America, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Michael L SteinbergUCLA Department of Radiation Oncology, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Ann C RaldowUCLA Department of Radiation Oncology, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8996-6810

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare patient perceptions of radiotherapy (RT) before and after treatment to better inform future patients and providers.

methodsSeventy-eight consecutive patients with rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neo- or adjuvant chemoradiation, surgical resection, and adjuvant chemotherapy from 2009 to 2018 and who were without recurrence were included. Patients were surveyed ≥6 months after ileostomy reversal or ≥3 months after adjuvant chemotherapy. The survey assessed patients' baseline knowledge and fears of RT, how their short- and long-term side effects compared with initial expectations, and how their experiences compared for each modality (RT, surgery, and chemotherapy).

resultsForty patient-responses were received. Before treatment, 70% of patients indicated little to no knowledge of RT, though 43% reported hearing frightening stories about RT. The most commonly top-ranked fears included organ damage (26%), skin burns (14%), and inability to carry out normal daily activities (10%). Eighty percent reported short-term effects of RT to be less than or as expected, with urinary changes (93%), abdominal discomfort (90%), and anxiety (88%) most commonly rated as less than or as expected. 85% reported long-term effects to be less than or as expected, with pain (95%), changes to the appearance of the treated area (85%), and dissatisfaction with body image (80%) most commonly rated as less than or as expected. Surgery was most commonly rated as the most difficult treatment (50%) and most responsible for long-term effects (55%). RT was least commonly rated as the most difficult treatment (13%), and chemotherapy was least commonly rated as most responsible for long-term effects (13%).

conclusionsThe majority of patients indicated short- and long-term side effects of RT for rectal cancer to be better than initial expectations. In the context of trimodality therapy, patients reported RT to be the least difficult of the treatments.

Indexed as

MotivationRectal NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantFearHumansRadiotherapy, Adjuvantcancer educationcancer preventioncancer risk factorsradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID37772467
PMCPMC10587958

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.