ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Plus Local Excision vs. Radical Surgery in T1-2N0M0 Rectal Carcinoma: A SEER-based Propensity Matching Study.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) following local excision (LE) presents a potential strategy for organ preservation in the treatment of early-stage rectal carcinoma that is better than radical surgery (RS), such as Total Mesorectal Excision (TME). Nonetheless, the precise oncological outcomes associated with this approach remain uncertain.
methodWe collected clinicopathological data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. To rectify the imbalances in baseline covariates (P < 0.05) between the local excision group and the radical resection group, we employed a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) approach. A logistic proportional odds ratio (OR) was employed for the purpose of discerning the factors linked to cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsA total of 4882 eligible patients were enrolled in this research. 72 patients were treated with NCRT plus local excision (NCRT + LE group), and 4810 were treated with radical surgery (RS group). Before propensity score matching (PSM), the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 98.5%, 83.3%, and 46.3% in the NCRT + LE group and 88.8%, 81.8%, and 67.1% in the RS group (P = 0.487, HR = 0.843, 95% CI 0.522-1.363), respectively. In the CSS cohort before PSM, the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year OS rates were 98.2%, 92.5%, and 45.6% in the NCRT + LE group and 96.8%, 93.3%, and 76.1% in the RS group (P = 0.374, HR = 0.719, 95% CI 0.347-1.492). After 1:1 PSM, each group had 65 patients. The 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival rates were 98.3%, 92.5%, and 70.8% in the NCRT + LE group and 94.8%, 92.2%, and 86.4% in the RS group (P = 0.350, HR = 0.701, 95% CI 0.331-1.483), respectively. In the CSS cohort after PSM, the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival rates were 98.2%, 92.3%, and 70.1% in the NCRT + LE group and 96.8%, 93.3%, and 91.1% in the RS group (P = 0.219, HR = 0.560, 95% CI 0.176-1.179), respectively.
conclusionIn this SEER-based analysis, no statistically significant difference in OS or CSS was detected. However, due to limited statistical power, these findings do not indicate equivalence and are hypothesis-generating only.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42106494What 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.