ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2025
Comparison of Five Pathological Tumor Regression Grading Systems for Rectal Cancer Following Chemoradiation: Correlation Coefficient and Intra-Rater Reliability.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the correlation among five different types of tumor regression grading (TRG) systems. Test-retest reliability analyses were conducted at two time points to assess the internal validity and consistency of these five TRG systems.
methodsA test-retest study was performed in 34 pathologically confirmed rectal adenocarcinoma specimens. All patients underwent pre-operative CRT followed by total mesorectal resection. Each specimen was examined twice to examine the variability of test-retest measurements. Every specimen was examined according to the 5 different TRG systems (Dworak, Mandard, Ryan, AJCC, modified Ryan). The time interval between the initial assessment and the repeat assessment was 3 weeks by the same pathologist who was not allowed to know the results of his initial measurements.
resultFor TRG systems comparing therapy-induced fibrosis in relation to residual tumor, a very strong correlation among them was found, with correlation coefficient values ranging from 0.964 to 1. The modified Ryan TRG system determines the degree of tumor regression based solely on the quantity of residual viable cancer cells only (not fibrosis). The system had lower correlation coefficient values, ranging from 0.549 to 0.617. The present study revealed an excellent intra-rater correlation coefficient of 0.947 (95% CI: 0.895-0.974) for the Mandard and Dworak TRG systems, 0.918 (95% CI: 835-0.959) for the Ryan TRG system, 0.957 (95% CI: 0.913-0.978) for the AJCC TRG system, and 0.934 (95% CI: 0.867-0.967) for the modified Ryan TRG system.
conclusionTRG systems with different scales categorizing tumor regression based on residual tumor and fibrosis revealed a strong to very strong correlation among them. The modified Ryan system, which categorizes tumor regression based solely on the quantity of residual viable cancer cells (not fibrosis), resulted in discrepancies in interpretations and lower correlation values. The present study revealed an excellent intra-rater correlation coefficient with high internal validity.
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.