ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2026
The impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on safety and long-term survival in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has proven effective for various tumors and is increasingly being adopted as the standard of care for many cancer types. However, its role in the management of locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of NAC in patients with LACC.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patient records from a prospective database of individuals who underwent colon surgery between January 2015 and May 2019. Among 1,879 patients, 143 received NAC. To minimize selection bias and ensure comparability between groups, a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed between the NAC and upfront surgery groups.
resultsAfter matching, the NAC group included 134 patients and the upfront surgery group included 268 patients, showing no significant differences in baseline demographic and oncological characteristics. In the NAC group, 16 (11.9%) achieved a pathological complete response (TRG 0), 26 (19.4%) had a moderate response (TRG 1), 55 (41.0%) showed a minimal response (TRG 2), and 37 (27.6%) had a poor response (TRG 3). The R0 resection rate was higher in the NAC group at 97.8% (131/134) compared to 92.5% (248/268) in the upfront surgery group. The rates of severe postoperative complications, bowel function recovery, length of hospital stay, and 30-day readmission were similar between the groups. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was significantly higher in the NAC group than in the upfront surgery group (75.2% vs. 63.4%, p = 0.034). However, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 80.4% in the NAC group and 76.3% in the upfront surgery group, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.098).
conclusionNAC increases R0 resection and 5-year DFS rates in LACC patients without elevating the risk of severe postoperative complications, demonstrating its safety and feasibility.
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.