ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2026
Defining endoscopic candidacy for intermediate size rectal neuroendocrine tumors.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 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.
- Article
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
Endoscopic resection is standard for small, well-differentiated rectal neuroendocrine tumors, but management of intermediate lesions remains unsettled. In a large single-center cohort with propensity score matching, endoscopic treatment of grade 1 tumors measuring 1.0-1.5 cm achieved high negative-margin rates and no observed recurrences over a median 54-month follow-up, mirroring outcomes for lesions < 1 cm. Lymphovascular invasion was absent in the intermediate group, and endoscopic submucosal dissection was used more often than mucosal resection. These data support endoscopic resection as a feasible organ preserving option in carefully staged, well differentiated intermediate size tumors. Priorities now include prospective, multicenter validation; standardized pre-resection staging with high-resolution endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound; refined risk stratification incorporating depth and lymphovascular invasion; pragmatic surveillance schedules; and assessment of patient-reported outcomes, function, and costs. Developing decision tools and targeted training to optimize endoscopic technique may further expand safe, individualized care, and health economic analyses.
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.