ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2024
Comparing surgical and endoscopic resection approaches for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors within the diameter range of 10-20mm: an inverse probability weighting analysis based on the SEER database.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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, 1 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Currently, the primary treatment modalities for colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (CRNET) with a diameter between 10mm and 20mm are surgical resection (SR) and endoscopic resection (ER). However, it remains unclear which surgical approach yields the greatest survival benefit for patients. Methods: This study included data from patients diagnosed with CRNET with tumor diameters ranging from 10mm to 20mm between the years 2004 and 2019, obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patients were categorized into ER and SR groups based on the respective surgical approaches. Inverse probability weighting (IPTW) was employed to mitigate selection bias. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were utilized to estimate overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Cox regression analysis (univariate and multivariate) was performed to evaluate potential factors influencing survival. Results: A total of 292 CRNET patients were included in this study (ER group: 108 individuals, SR group: 184 individuals). Prior to IPTW adjustment, Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis demonstrated that the OS and CSS of the SR group were inferior to those of the ER group. However, after IPTW adjustment, no statistically significant differences in prognosis were observed between the two groups. Subgroup analyses revealed that patients with muscular invasion, positive lymph nodes, or distant metastasis derived greater survival benefits from SR. Significant differences in OS and CSS between the two groups were also observed across different age groups. Conclusion: For patients with mucosal-limited lesions and without local lymph node or distant metastasis, ER is the preferred surgical approach. However, for patients with muscular invasion or positive lymph nodes/distant metastasis, SR offers a better prognosis. The choice of surgical approach should be based on the specific clinical characteristics of patients within different subgroups.
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.