Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40654321›Full record

ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2025

Outcomes of Organ-Preserving Local Excision Compared to Radical Resection in Stage I Early-Onset Rectal Cancer: A Propensity-Score SEER-Based Analysis.

Spencer Barnes, Sameh Hany Emile, Anjelli Wignakumar, Justin Dourado, Cameron Perrone, Matthew Bilotti, Steven D Wexner

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal 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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Spencer BarnesEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Sameh Hany EmileEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7854-5244
Anjelli WignakumarEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Justin DouradoEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Cameron PerroneEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Matthew BilottiEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Steven D WexnerEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8046-5753

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrgan-preserving approaches to rectal cancer have shown promising results in reducing adverse events and improving quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of organ-preserving local excision (LE) and radical resection (RR) for patients with stage I early-onset rectal cancer.

methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients aged 20-50 years with clinical stage I rectal cancer were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2020). Patients were divided according to the type of surgery into two groups: LE and RR. The groups were propensity-score matched for tumor grade, stage, size, and pretreatment CEA levels. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were the main outcomes. Kaplan-Meier statistics and Cox regression analyses were used to assess survival.

resultsFrom a total of 5846 patients (LE = 1,654; RR = 4192), 545 LE and 1090 RR patients were included after matching. There were no significant differences between LE and RR in the 5-year restricted mean OS (57.6 vs 57.7 months, p = 0.769) or CSS (58.3 vs 58.2 months, p = 0.8). The type of surgical resection was not independently associated with OS (HR: 1.26, 95%CI: 0.77, 2.08, p = 0.357) or CSS (HR: 1.18, 95%CI: 0.62, 2.24, p = 0.611).

conclusionOur results underscore the need for tailored treatment guidelines for younger patients with stage I rectal cancer, and advocates for less invasive treatments that preserve organ function without altering oncological outcomes in patients with stage I early-onset rectal cancer.

Indexed as

Organ Sparing TreatmentsProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesSEER ProgramSurvival RateYoung Adultearly‐onsetearly‐stageorgan‐preserving local excisionradical resectionrectal cancerSEER

Identifiers

PMID40654321
PMCPMC12455523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.