Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41410859›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026

Rectal Cancer Watch-and-Wait Management of Patients With Tumors Within Versus Beyond the Reach of Digital Rectal Examination.

Michael Boysen, Samuel H Lai, Sara Byers, Maria Widmar, Anthony Loria, Tara Russell, Jonathan S Abelson, Fergal J Fleming, John Rt Monson, Jon D Vogel and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
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

11 authors.

Michael BoysenDepartment of Surgery, Trinity Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Samuel H LaiDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Sara ByersUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Maria WidmarDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Anthony LoriaDepartment of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Tara RussellDepartment of Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jonathan S AbelsonDepartment of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA.
Fergal J FlemingDepartment of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
John Rt MonsonDanbury Hospital, Northwell Health,, Danbury, CT, USA.
Jon D VogelDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA. Jon.vogel@cuanschutz.edu.
U.S. Rectal Cancer Research Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWatch-and-wait management (WW) of rectal cancer is accepted for select patients with a complete clinical response (cCR) to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). The appropriateness of WW for cancers beyond the reach of digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or with a delayed cCR is unclear.

methodsIn this retrospective multicenter study, tumor palpability and clinical response were determined after NAT. Local regrowth-free survival (LRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), rectal organ preservation (OP), and salvage surgery outcomes were assessed.

resultsAmong 477 patients, 427 (90%) had palpable tumers, with initial cCR in 389 (91%) and delayed cCR in 38 (9%) patients, respectively, whereas 50 (10%) had nonpalpable tumors, with initial pCR in 38 (76%) and delayed pCR in 12 (24%) patients, respectively (p < 0.01). The 3-year LRFS rate was 81.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.6-86.2%) for palpable tumors and 74.3% (95% CI, 61.0-88.6%) for nonpalpable tumors. The DFS rates were 80.8 % (95 % CI, 75.9-85.7%) and 74.3% (95% CI, 61.0-88.6%), respectively. The 3-year rectal OP rate was 82.7% (95% CI, 77.9-87.5%) and 76.0% (95%, CI, 62.9-89.1%), respectively, with no difference in the survival curves for these three outcomes. (all p > 0.05). The patients with initial cCR or delayed cCR also had no differences in LRFS, DFS, or OP, but the interval to each of these outcomes were decreased with delayed cCR (all p < 0.01).

conclusionWatch-and-wait management of rectal tumors beyond the reach of DRE is appropriate, with oncologic and rectal organ preservation rates that do not differ from patients with palpable tumors. In comparison to cancers with initial cCR, cancers with delayed cCR have accelerated intervals to local regrowth, disease recurrence, and rectal organ loss.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaDigital Rectal ExaminationNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRectal NeoplasmsWatchful WaitingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyPrognosisRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID41410859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.