ArticleTranslational cancer research2025
Survival outcomes of local versus radical resection for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based study.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal surgical modality for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (ANETs) remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the optimal surgical approach for ANETs by comparing the outcomes between local resection (LR) and radical resection (RR). Methods: Individuals diagnosed with ANETs during the period from 2000 to 2020 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection bias. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Additionally, multivariate Cox analysis assessed risk factors linked to OS and CSS. Results: The study enrolled 4,944 patients, comprising 3,804 in the LR group and 1,140 in the RR group. Patients receiving RR had higher tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stages (P<0.001), higher age (P<0.001), and larger tumor sizes (P<0.001). Both the 5-year OS and CSS in the LR group were significantly better than those in the RR group (87.3% Conclusions: This study indicated that, for patients with ANETs, there was no survival advantage observed for RR when compared to LR, implying that LR might suffice as a treatment for these patients.
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.