ArticleBMC surgery2026
Prognostic impact of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia at the resection margin in pancreas cancer.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection, it is essential to secure a negative surgical margin for cancer cells. However, the prognostic impact of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) at the resection margin remains unclear.
methodsPatients with PDAC who underwent pancreatectomy at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. Based on the pathological diagnosis of the pancreatic resection margin, the patients were classified into three groups: cancer-negative (Neg), low-grade PanIN (LG-PanIN), and cancer-positive (Pos). The postoperative prognoses between the groups were compared. Prognostic factors were compared using the Cox regression analysis.
resultsOf the 101 patients, the numbers per margin category were as follows: Neg, n=74; LG-PanIN, n=18; and Pos, n=9. Regarding disease-specific survival (DSS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS), the LG-PanIN group had the best prognosis, while the Pos group had the worst. Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that being positive for peritoneal lavage cytology was the independent poor prognostic factor for DSS (hazard ratio, 2.42 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01–5.80]; P=0.047). The microscopically poorly differentiated type had poorer DSS (P=0.049) and RFS (P=0.031) prognoses than did the others.
conclusionsIn our hypothesis generating study for observational cohort, the presence of LG-PanIN at the resection margin did not negatively affect the prognosis. Although the results cannot imply the direct surgical recommendations, it would affect to determine whether additional resection of pancreatic margin should be performed during surgery.
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.