ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Clinical Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.
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. 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.
- Prognostic Significance of GLIM-Defined Malnutrition in Patients With Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Following Upfront Surgery.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant therapy is recommended for treating resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC); however, its appropriate use in patients with resectable PDAC remains debatable.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify independent poor prognostic factors and evaluate the clinical significance of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable PDAC.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients diagnosed with resectable PDAC at our institute between January 2003 and December 2022. We analyzed poor prognostic factors at the time of diagnosis in patients who underwent upfront surgery using the Cox proportional hazards model for overall survival (OS). The prognostic score was calculated by adding the individual prognostic factor scores.
resultsOverall, 359 patients were included in this study, with 308 patients undergoing upfront surgery and the remaining 51 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the neoadjuvant therapy group (70.6%) than in the upfront surgery group (64.0%). Multivariate analysis in the upfront surgery group revealed the following independent poor prognostic factors: tumor size ≥ 35 mm, serum albumin level ≤ .5 g/dL, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥ 3.5, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level ≥ 250 U/mL, and Duke pancreatic monoclonal antigen type 2 level ≥ 750 U/mL. Among patients with prognostic scores of 0-1 (n = 263), the intention-to-treat OS did not significantly differ between the neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery groups. Among those patients with a prognostic score of ≥ 2 (n = 96), the neoadjuvant therapy group had significantly longer intention-to-treat OS than the upfront surgery group.
conclusionsPrognostic score-based stratification can help identify patients who could benefit from neoadjuvant therapy.
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.