Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42582989›Full record

ArticleESMO gastrointestinal oncology2026

Reassessing the role of CEA in the treatment of rectal cancer in the era of TNT.

M Diefenhardt, R-D Hofheinz, M Fleischmann, A Schlenska-Lange, R Grützmann, S Kirste, T Kuhnt, R Kosmala, C Rödel, A Wiegering and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

M DiefenhardtDepartment of Radiotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
R-D HofheinzDepartment of Hematology and Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
M FleischmannDepartment of Radiotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
A Schlenska-LangeDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Hospital Barmherzige Brüder Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
R GrützmannDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
S KirsteDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany.
T KuhntDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
R KosmalaDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
C RödelDepartment of Radiotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
A WiegeringDepartment of General, Visceral, Transplantation, and Thoracic Surgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
M GhadimiDepartment of General, Visceral and Pediatric Surgery, University Göttingen, University Hospital, Göttingen, Germany.
C GaniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
E FokasDepartment of Radiotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
D MartinDepartment of Radiotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

CEAclinical trialrectal cancersurveillancetotal neoadjuvant therapy

Identifiers

PMID42582989
PMCPMC13459590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.