ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024
Findings in magnetic resonance imaging for restaging locally advanced rectal cancer.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to assess the prognostic value of restaging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy and compare long-course chemoradiotherapy (LC-CRT) to short-course radiotherapy with delayed surgery (SCRT-delay).
methodsThis retrospective study included 267 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) operated on between January 2016 and April 2019, all of whom received either LC-CRT or SCRT-delay in the neoadjuvant setting. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) based on radiological response assessed using the magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (mrTRG).
resultsIn the LC-CRT group, cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 94.8%, 86.4%, and 79.0%, while in the SCRT-delay group, they were 83.3%, 68.9%, and 68.9% (P = 0.017). For CSS in the LC-CRT group, cumulative rates were 96.9%, 90.3%, and 85.0%, and in the SCRT-delay group, they were 88.6%, 81.4%, and 81.4% (P = 0.222). There were no significant differences in total histological response rates or local recurrence rates between the treatment groups. The good and moderate response group (mrTRG 1-3) had significantly better cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and CSS compared to the poorer response group (mrTRG 4-5) (P = 0.023 for OS and P = 0.048 for CSS).
conclusionUnfavorable MRI response is a sign of poor prognosis in LARC. SCRT-delay is comparable to LC-CRT concerning the oncological outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.