ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Comparison of neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a retrospective study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive solid tumors and ranks as the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in Western nations. The aim of the current study was to compare upfront surgery (US) and neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with resectable PDAC in terms of perioperative outcomes, early and late complications, overall survival, the recurrence rate, and readmission. Materials and Methods: In this study, all patients who underwent US or NAT for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma between January 2006 and March 2021 were retrospectively identified from institutional databases. Results: The NAT and US groups included 63 and 113 patients. The NAT group had significantly higher rates of arterial and venous resection and distal and total pancreatectomy, but no significant differences in anastomosis technique, pathology, margin status, invasion, stage, or early/late complications. The US group had significantly longer mean overall survival (63.66 vs. 34.10 months, Conclusion: Our study revealed that US and NAT do not differ in terms of overall survival, recurrence, readmission, and early and late complications; however, given that the NAT group had a worse prognosis, our findings suggest that NAT may provide a survival benefit for high-risk patients suffering from resectable PDAC.
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.