ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Association of radiotherapy with secondary pelvic cancers in male patients with rectal cancer.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Undifferentiated pelvic sarcoma 5 years post-radiochemotherapy for rectal adenocarcinoma: A case report.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- A study on the temporal patterns, anatomical distribution, and influencing factors of radiation therapy-associated second primary cancers in gynecological malignancies.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to explore the risk of secondary prostate cancer (SPC) and secondary bladder cancer (SBC) in male rectal cancer (RC) patients after radiotherapy (RT) and to assess survival outcomes.
methodsThis large population-based study included men with RC from nine registries in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 1973 and 2015. Fine-Gray competing risks and Poisson regression were used to assess the RT-related risk of SPC and SBC in patients who received RT versus those who did not (NRT).
resultsAfter exclusion, 28,886 RC patients were included in further analysis, including 9763 RT-treated patients (33.8%) and 19,123 patients not treated with RT (66.2%). In competing risk regression analysis, RT was associated with a low risk of developing SPC (adjusted HR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.64-0.82; P < 0.001) and with a high risk of developing SBC (adjusted HR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.15-1.80; P = 0.001). In the survival analysis of SPC patients, the NRT group exhibited better 10-year OS and CSS than the RT group (OS: HR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.43-0.64; P < 0.001; CSS: HR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.26-0.56; P < 0.001).
conclusionMale rectal cancer patients receiving RT had a decreased risk of SPC and an increased risk of SBC, and the prognosis of SPC patients in the RT group was worse compared to that of the NRT group. Follow-up and monitoring of SBC and SPC should not be ignored.
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.