Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42704578›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026

Evidence Gap in Managing Lateral Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer: a Systematic Review of Radiation Boost Strategies.

Sedat Alp Pinar, Tin-Ning Wong, Timothy Mitchell, Chia Yew Kong

Abstract readSystematic ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Sedat Alp PinarAcademic Unit of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary and University of Glasgow, 8-16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow, G31 2ER, United Kingdom. sedatalp.pinar@nhs.scot.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-9119-9080
Tin-Ning WongAcademic Unit of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary and University of Glasgow, 8-16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow, G31 2ER, United Kingdom.
Timothy MitchellDepartment of Oncology, The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Chia Yew KongAcademic Unit of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary and University of Glasgow, 8-16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow, G31 2ER, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN) involvement is a significant predictor of local recurrence in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). While lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) is routinely used in some countries to manage suspicious nodes, it is associated with increased morbidity and is not widely adopted in Western practice. Radiation boost (dose escalation) to involved LPLNs during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) has emerged as a potential non-surgical alternative. Despite increasing adoption of radiation boost to clinically involved LPLNs, there remains limited evidence defining its safety, oncologic benefit, and role relative to LPLND.

methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they reported outcomes of radiation dose escalation specifically targeting radiologically suspicious LPLNs in the context of nCRT.

resultsTen retrospective cohort studies encompassing 482 radiation boosted patients were included. Boost doses ranged from 35.0 to 60.2 Gy. Rates of Grade 2-3 toxicity ranged from 28.0% to 39.3% across individual studies, with only one study reporting a single Grade 4 adverse event. Across individual studies, reported nodal response rates ranged from 62.3% to 100%. Comparative studies suggest that radiation boost may improve local control and reduce LPLN recurrence.

conclusionCurrent retrospective evidence suggests that radiation dose escalation to involved LPLNs is a promising treatment strategy; however, the available data are limited by retrospective study designs and substantial clinical heterogeneity. Given the absence of prospective evidence and lack of consensus in current guidelines, an important evidence gap remains. Well-designed prospective trials are warranted to define the role of LPLN boost relative to LPLND.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRectal NeoplasmsRe-IrradiationHumansLymphatic MetastasisNeoadjuvant TherapyPelvisRadiotherapy DosageDose escalationPelvic lymph nodesRadiation oncologyRadiotherapy boostRectal cancerSimultaneous-intensity boost

Identifiers

PMID42704578
PMCPMC13550032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.