ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Patterns of Care and Oncologic Outcomes after Pelvic Exenteration for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer in the United States.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPelvic exenterations (PEs) are technically demanding procedures performed with curative intent for advanced malignancies to improve patient survival while balancing morbidity and functional outcomes. The majority of United States (US) data regarding PE for rectal cancers originate from single-center series.
objectiveWe aimed to investigate patterns of care and oncologic outcomes for primary rectal cancer patients undergoing PE in a national registry.
methodsThe National Cancer Database (2004-2019) was queried for adults with a pT4 rectal adenocarcinoma. Logistic regression identified factors associated with positive margins. Multivariable Cox regression estimated treatment effects on overall survival (OS).
resultsOf 673 patients (73% <65 years of age, 39% male, 82% White), median follow-up was 39 months. The majority received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (76%) and radiation (75%), while adjuvant chemotherapy (37%) and radiation (13%) were less common. Twenty-four percent had positive margins (R1 = 98, R2 = 11, R + NOS = 48). Univariable analysis demonstrated that only nodal involvement was associated with higher positive margin rates (odds ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.51). Five-year OS for R0 and R+ resections were 55% and 33%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, age <65 years (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-0.99) and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47-0.82) were associated with improved OS, while N+ status (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.67-2.70) and positive margins (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.41-2.35) portended worse prognosis. No significant associations were observed between outcomes and institutional volume.
conclusionOne in four US patients undergoing PE for locally advanced rectal cancer had an R+ resection regardless of center volume. Quality of surgical resection to achieve negative margins remains the most relevant prognostic factor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39617860What 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.