ReviewCancers2025
Quality of Life in Rectal Cancer Treatments: An Updated Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials (2013-2023).
Review in Cancers, 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.
- Clinical and treatment-related predictors of complete response after total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer in a large multicenter analysis.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Quality of Life and Functional Outcomes After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparative Study Applying EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, and LARS Score at 1-6 Months Postoperatively.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRectal cancer management involves surgery, chemotherapy (CT), radiotherapy (RT), and patient care strategies, all of which significantly affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Understanding these effects is critical for optimizing treatment protocols. This review aimed to systematically analyze the impact of rectal cancer treatment on HRQoL.
methodsFour databases, Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2013 and December 2023. RCTs specifically focusing on rectal cancer treatments (surgical interventions, pre- and/or post-CT and/or RT, and patient care strategies) were included. An abstract review, data extraction, and a risk-of-bias assessment were independently conducted by two reviewers.
resultsThe 41 included studies comprised 9240 patients: 16 evaluated surgical interventions (3507 patients), 15 evaluated pre- and/or post-CT and/or RT protocols (5114 patients), and 10 focused on patient-care strategies (619 patients). Sphincter-sparing procedures were associated with better HRQoL than abdominoperineal resection, and rectal-sparing techniques were associated with better overall HRQoL than rectal resection. RT was associated with a poorer HRQoL. Continuity-of-care interventions improved HRQoL in ostomy patients, whereas transanal irrigation improved HRQoL after ostomy closure.
conclusionsThis systematic review of RCTs underscores the importance of organ-sparing strategies, such as rectum-sparing approaches and continuity-of-care packages, in improving HRQoL in patients with rectal cancer. Although RT negatively affects HRQoL, treatment regimens should be individualized. Tailored organ-preservation approaches and structured follow-up care are essential for optimizing HRQoL in patients with rectal cancer.
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.