ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2024
Omission of Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Evaluation of PROSPECT in a National Database.
Article in Journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe PROSPECT trial showed noninferiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with selective chemoradiation (CRT) versus CRT alone. However, trial results are often difficult to reproduce with real-world data. Pathologic outcomes and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by neoadjuvant strategy in locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma patients in a national database.
methodsThe 2012-2020 National Cancer Database was queried for clinical T2N1 and T3N0-1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients with definitive resection. Patients were categorized by neoadjuvant treatment with CRT alone, NAC alone, and NAC with CRT. Outcomes included R0 resection, pathologic complete response (PCR), and OS.
resultsOf 18 892 patients, 16 126 (85.4%) received CRT, 1018 (5.4%) NAC, and 1748 (9.3%) NAC with CRT. Patients with NAC alone or NAC with CRT were more likely to have stage-III disease, private insurance, and academic facility treatment (all p < 0.001). NAC alone had lower adjusted odds of an R0 resection (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.54-0.95) and PCR (OR 0.77; 95%CI 0.64-0.93). NAC with CRT demonstrated improved OS (HR 0.71; 95%CI 0.61-0.82), with no difference between NAC and CRT alone. Among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, no differences in OS were seen.
conclusionsPatients who received NAC alone had worse pathologic outcomes. NAC had similar OS to CRT and NAC with CRT showed improved OS.
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.