ArticleESMO gastrointestinal oncology2026
Reassessing the role of CEA in the treatment of rectal cancer in the era of TNT.
Article in ESMO gastrointestinal 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is an integral part of surveillance strategies in rectal cancer. We evaluated the prognostic significance of CEA level before total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) and its role in surveillance strategies after TNT. Patients and methods: This Results: Baseline CEA levels were available for 282 patients (92%). The median baseline CEA level was 5.45 ng/ml for patients with ypN+, 3.35 ng/ml for patients with ypT+, and 2.45 ng/ml for patients with complete response (CR: pathological CR + clinical CR). Only baseline CEA levels and baseline white blood cell count remained significant parameters in a best-fit generalized linear regression model predicting CR (area under the curve 0.725). In a multivariate Fine-Gray model, CEA was significantly associated with treatment failure (TF); TNT only showed a significant reduction in the risk of TF in the subgroup of patients with baseline CEA >10 ng/ml compared with patients treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) CRT and adjuvant 5-FU in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial. The risk of TF was 13% in patients with no CEA elevation >3 ng/ml during follow-up, compared with 54% (63%) in patients with CEA elevation >5 ng/ml (10 ng/ml). No local recurrence after TNT was associated with an elevated CEA level >5 ng/ml. Conclusions: Baseline CEA levels should be considered an integral part of risk-adapted treatment strategies and remain an essential and cost-effective part of surveillance strategies after TNT.
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.