ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Late toxicity after peposertib-enhanced chemoradiation in rectal cancer patients managed with organ preservation.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibition as a radiosensitizer in rectal cancer: toxicity must be evaluated in the context of organ preservation.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 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
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and purpose: Combining peposertib, a DNA-PK inhibitor, with capecitabine-based chemoradiation may improve tumor response and organ preservation in rectal cancer. We assessed how adding peposertib to chemoradiation impacts organ preservation-specific outcomes and toxicities. Materials and methods: In a recent phase Ib trial, rectal cancer patients underwent neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation with peposertib. Patients were then restaged: those with clinical complete responses (cCRs) were offered "watch-and-wait" (WW), while those with non-cCRs (near complete and incomplete responses) were recommended surgery, although most opted for consolidation chemotherapy. Six patients were selected for this post-hoc analysis with primary endpoints of organ preservation rate, tumor response rates, and characterization of late grade 3 + toxicities. Results: Tumor response rates showed 50 % of patients (3/6) achieved cCR and entered WW. Additionally, the frequency of late grade 3 + toxicity was 50 % (3/6). Late grade 3 + toxicity was exclusively observed in patients with cCR entering WW, and all toxicities were specific to the rectum (severe proctitis and bowel fistulization). In contrast, no late grade 3 + toxicities were seen when disease was managed by oncologic surgical resection. Finally, while overall three-year organ preservation rate was 60 % (3/5), patients with organ preservation also had increased rates of late grade 3 + rectal toxicities (66 %, 2/3). Conclusion: Combining peposertib with capecitabine-based chemoradiation was associated with disproportionately high risks of severe late rectal toxicities, particularly in patients entering WW. Thus, careful assessment of the toxicity and response profiles of novel neoadjuvant regimens is critically important in future clinical trials focused on organ preservation and the nonoperative management of rectal cancer.
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.