ReviewInternational journal of health sciences
Novel regimens and treatment strategies in neoadjuvant therapy for colorectal cancer: A systematic review.
Review in International journal of health sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Navigating the Colorectal Cancer Maze: Unveiling Pathways To Diagnosis, Management, Pathophysiology and Prevention.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to describe novel regimens and treatment strategies in neoadjuvant therapy for colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim was to summarize the current advancements in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for CRC, including the use of cytotoxic drugs, targeted treatments, and immunotherapy. The analysis aimed to provide insights into the potential benefits and drawbacks of these novel approaches and highlight the need for further research to optimize NACT use in CRC and improve patient outcomes. Methods: From October 20, 2023, to December 10, 2023, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and Scopus. Studies addressing the use of and treatment strategies for CRC and neoadjuvant therapies were included. Screening was conducted in two steps, initially by title and abstract and then by full-text articles. English-language articles were considered, while preprints, non-English publications, and articles published as grey literature were excluded from the study. A total of 85 studies were selected for further analysis after screening and filtering. Results: After filtering out duplicates and items that were irrelevant to our research query from the initial database search's 510 results, 397 unique articles were found. Eighty-five studies were chosen for additional analysis after the articles underwent two rounds of screening. Conclusion: The review concluded that neoadjuvant therapy for CRC has evolved beyond conventional approaches and holds promise for improving patient outcomes. Future prospects for advancing neoadjuvant approaches are promising, with ongoing clinical trials investigating the refinement of strategies, identification of predictive biomarkers, and optimization of patient selection. The adoption of novel regimens, precision medicine, and immunotherapy offers opportunities to redefine treatment paradigms and enhance patient care in CRC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39282125PMC11393386What 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.