ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Conversations in rectal cancer treatment: a qualitative study of multidisciplinary clinician perspective into non-operative management decision-making discussions.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFor select patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who achieve a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy, non-operative management (NOM) offers an alternative to surgery but introduces uncertainty and an intensive surveillance burden. Decisions between NOM and surgery are preference-sensitive and evolve as treatment response becomes clearer. How clinicians operationalize shared decision-making (SDM) for NOM remains poorly understood. We aimed to characterize clinician communication strategies and decision processes surrounding NOM, focusing on risk framing and management of uncertainty.
methodsEighteen colorectal surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists from two academic medical centers completed 30-60-min semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were coded inductively and analyzed using constant comparison methods and iterative codebook development.
resultsClinicians described discussions about NOM as a longitudinal, multidisciplinary process that unfolds across multiple encounters and clinical specialties, with medical oncologists and surgeons contributing at different points along the treatment trajectory. Complex information was organized through evidence-based explanations and various risk-framing approaches, allowing patients to engage in iterative deliberation while setting clear expectations about the conditional nature of NOM and the demands of ongoing surveillance. The timing and emphasis of discussions varied by treatment phase and clinical role, which supported gradual patient understanding but also created the potential for unrealistic expectations when recommendations from the treatment team were not clearly aligned.
conclusionDecision-making about NOM for LARC unfolds over time under clinical uncertainty and across specialties. Structured, phase-specific communication and improved interprofessional alignment may strengthen shared decision-making in this preference-sensitive context.
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.