Observational studyDeutsches Arzteblatt international2026
Pretreatment MRI Versus Postoperative Pathology in Locoregional Staging of Rectal Cancer: A Germany-Wide Multicenter Re-Evaluation Study in Non-Pretreated Patients Based on the OCUM Study.
Observational study in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Neoadjuvant treatment of MMR-proficient rectal cancer : Focus on cancer of the middle and lower third segments].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance and Misclassification Patterns of Preoperative MRI in Rectal Cancer: A Real-World Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pretreatment MRI: One of the Key Components of Treatment Planning.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the standard diagnostic technique for the locoregional assessment of rectal cancer. The pertinent guidelines recommend neoadjuvant therapy depending on cT and cN categories. In this experimental study, we examined the accuracy of pretreatment MRI staging.
methodsMRIs of 50 patients from the OCUM study (non-pretreated, 24 women, histologically confirmed rectal adenocarcinoma, located ≤12cm from the anal verge, stages I-III) were re-assessed by 74 radiologists affiliated with certified colorectal cancer centers. The radiologically determined Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stages were compared with the histopathological findings, which were unknown to the radiologists. The degree of agreement between the radiologists' assessments and the histopathology was analyzed with κ
results2915 complete assessments were performed for cTcN (UICC stages); 740 cases (25.4%) were not classifiable because of cTX (0.1%) or cNX (25.3%). The UICC stage accorded with the histopathology in 979 cases (33.6%); there was overstaging in 737 cases (25.3%) and understaging in 459 (15.7%). The κ
conclusionAlthough MRI remains the standard diagnostic technique for the locoregional assessment of rectal cancer, its accuracy for T- and N-staging in rectal cancer is low, particularly with regard to the distinction of T2 from T3a/b and the assessment of lymph nodes. The assessment of MRF and EMVI is much more reliable.
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.