ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2025
Impact of rectal cancer multidisciplinary conferences on patient care plans.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 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.
- Impact of rectal cancer multidisciplinary conferences on patient care plans.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimMultidisciplinary conferences (MDCs) are standard of care for rectal cancer, and literature suggests that MDCs result in changes in as many as 50% of treatments plans. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of changes to treatment plans at MDCs at our local institution. Secondary outcomes included clinician attendance, change in pathology and radiology reports and the association between tumour stage and care plan changes.
methodPre- and postconference plans were prospectively collected. Care plan changes were defined as either major (intermodality) or minor (intramodality). Changes to radiology reports (T, N, M, extramural venous invasion or mesorectal fascial status) and pathology reports (primary diagnosis, status of mismatch repair or high-risk features) were tabulated. Associations between stage and conference plan outcome were determined with Fisher's exact test and multinomial logistic regression.
resultsPre- and postconference plans were prospectively recorded for 44 consecutive meetings. A total of 276 patients were reviewed, with 137 being new diagnoses of rectal adenocarcinoma. Radiology reports were changed in 26% (35/137) of patients and pathology reports were changed in 3% (4/137). Major changes to treatment plans occurred in 12% (17/137) and minor changes occurred in 28% (38/137) of cases. Other than an association between Stage 3 cancers and minor changes, no factor was predictive of care plan changes or confirmation.
conclusionMDC review resulted in changes to 40% of treatment plans, and no factors predicted confirmation of pretreatment plans. Our study supports the value of comprehensive review of every rectal cancer by MDC.
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.