SynthesisInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025
Comparison of the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-Term Outcomes of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Patients With and Without Preoperative Neoadjuvant Therapy.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Quantitative dual-energy computed tomography parameters as imaging biomarkers for assessing the histopathologic grade of colorectal cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Predicting treatment response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: A combined deep learning and machine learning approach utilizing longitudinal multi-sequence MRI.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- The revisional burden of colostomy: a temporal analysis of risk, patterns, and survival.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Multi-modal integration of histopathology and transcriptomics reveals STAB1Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of LNR- and LODDS-based predictive models for prognosis in non-elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- A commentary on 'Comparison of the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials'.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is considered to be the standard treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC); however, the risk of adverse events and postoperative recurrence remains significant. This study aimed to evaluate the non-inferiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) compared with nCRT in patients with LARC and to assess the possibility of eliminating radiotherapy on the basis of guaranteed efficacy. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of nCRT and nCT for LARC. The study protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).
resultsA total of 2706 patients from seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) between the nCT and nCRT groups. This study demonstrated a lower rate of infection (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.34-0.82; P = 0.005), anastomotic leak (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.34-0.87; P = 0.01), tumor regression grade (TRG) 0-1 (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.36-0.69; P < 0.0001), preventive diverting ileostomy (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.17-1.02; P = 0.05), and leukopenia (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.25-1.01; P = 0.05) in the nCT group. However, there was no significant difference in the other toxic events, such as intestinal obstruction, urinary complications, diarrhea, and surgical or pathological outcomes, such as clinical fistula, sphincter preservation, postoperative mortality (≤ 60 d), R0 resection, ypStage 0-I, positive circumferential resection margin (CRM+), or pathological complete response (pCR) between the two groups.
conclusionThis study indicated that OS and DFS were not lower in the nCT group than in the nCRT group. In addition, the nCT group had fewer complications. Preoperative nCT is expected to become a standard treatment option for most patients with stage II-III LARC. It is worth noting that radiotherapy cannot be ignored for some patients who need to ensure the conversion effect of neoadjuvant therapy and strongly request to preserve organ function.
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.