ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Endoscopic therapy versus surgical resection for elderly patients with colorectal neuroendocrine tumors.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of clinicopathological features, treatment modalities, and survival outcomes in advanced gastric and colorectal signet ring cell carcinoma.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical characteristics and long-term prognosis of primary mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the small intestine.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic therapy (ET) and surgical resection (SR) are common surgical methods for the treatment of colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (CRNETs). However, for elderly patients, it remains unclear which surgical method yields better long-term outcomes.
methodsElderly patients ≥ 65 years with CRNETs diagnosed from 2000 to 2020 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection bias. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to evaluate the effects of diverse demographic and clinical factors on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).
resultsA total of 2214 patients were included in the study, with 1417 patients in the ET group and 797 patients in the SR group. After PSM, the ET group outperformed the SR group in terms of OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.70) and CSS (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.11-0.40). Similarly, the ET group maintained its advantage in mean 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and CSS rates compared to the SR group (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified age, sex, grade, marital status, and treatment modality as independent risk factors affecting OS, while age, sex, marital status, and treatment modality were identified as independent risk factors affecting CSS.
conclusionsET offered superior long-term outcomes for elderly patients ≥ 65 years with CRNETs.
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.