Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39354612›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024

Outcomes and failure patterns after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer with positive lateral pelvic lymph nodes: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Shuai Li, Maxiaowei Song, Jian Tie, Xianggao Zhu, Yangzi Zhang, Hongzhi Wang, Jianhao Geng, Zhiyan Liu, Xin Sui, Huajing Teng and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Shuai Li *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Maxiaowei Song *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Jian Tie *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xianggao ZhuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yangzi ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Hongzhi WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Jianhao GengKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Zhiyan LiuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Xin SuiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Huajing TengKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yong CaiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
Yongheng LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. yonghenglee@163.com.
Weihu WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China. wangweihu88@163.com.

Funding

Beijing Hospitals Authority's Ascent Plan DFL20220902Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medical Development of special funding support, code ZLRK202327Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission Z181100001718192Capital's Funds for Health Improvement and Research No. 2020-2-1027National Natural Science Foundation No. 82073333
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to use propensity score matching (PSM) to explore the long-term outcomes and failure patterns in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients with positive versus negative lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN). MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with LARC were retrospectively divided into LPLN-positive and LPLN-negative groups. Clinical characteristics were compared between the groups using the chi-square test. PSM was applied to balance these differences. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and local-regional recurrence (LRR) and distant metastasis (DM) rates were compared between the groups using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests.

resultsA total of 651 LARC patients were included, 160 (24.6%) of whom had positive LPLN and 491 (75.4%) had negative LPLN. Before PSM, the LPLN-positive group had higher rates of lower location (53.1% vs. 43.0%, P = 0.025), T4 stage (37.5% vs. 23.2%, P = 0.002), mesorectal fascia (MRF)-positive (53.9% vs. 35.4%, P < 0.001) and extramural venous invasion (EMVI)-positive (51.2% vs. 27.2%, P < 0.001) disease than the LPLN-negative group. After PSM, there were 114 patients for each group along with the balanced clinical factors, and both groups had comparable surgery, pathologic complete response (pCR), and ypN stage rates. The median follow-up was 45.9 months, 3-year OS (88.3% vs. 92.1%, P = 0.276) and LRR (5.7% vs. 2.8%, P = 0.172) rates were comparable between LPLN-positive and LPLN-negative groups. Meanwhile, despite no statistical difference, 3-year PFS (78.8% vs. 85.9%, P = 0.065) and DM (20.4% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.061) rates slightly differed between the groups. 45 patients were diagnosed with DM, 11 (39.3%) LPLN-positive and 3 (17.6%) LPLN-negative patients were diagnosed with oligometastases (P = 0.109).

conclusionsOur study indicates that for LPLN-positive patients, there is a tendency of worse PFS and DM than LPLN-negative patients, and for this group patients, large samples are needed to further confirm our conclusion.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesPropensity ScoreRectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPelvisPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateLateral pelvic lymph nodesLocally advanced rectal cancerOligometastasesProgression-free survivalPropensity score matchingRecurrence patterns

Identifiers

PMID39354612
PMCPMC11443637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.