ArticleESMO gastrointestinal oncology2026
Consensus recommendations for the management of locally advanced rectal cancer.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) considerably impairs quality of life (QoL) and compromises prognosis. Immunotherapy induces complete responses in most patients with mismatch repair deficient/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-h) LARC, enabling organ preservation; however, challenges include access and inconsistent guideline recommendations. This Delphi study aimed to understand the unmet needs of patients with dMMR/MSI-h LARC and seek recommendations for appropriate diagnosis and management. Materials and methods: Europe-based clinical experts participated in a double-blinded modified Delphi panel, with two online surveys and a virtual consensus meeting. Consensus was defined as ≥80% rating their agreement or disagreement on a 9-point Likert scale. Results: Overall, 26 experts participated in the panel surveys, with 15 also participating in the final consensus meeting. Consensus was reached that dMMR/MSI-h LARC substantially affects QoL and a multidisciplinary team is needed for diagnosis, treatment planning, reflex mismatch repair/MSI testing, and staging. Panelists reached consensus that immunotherapy is an efficacious standard of care, offering high complete response rates, a favorable safety profile, and improved QoL. Consensus was also reached that unmet needs include long-term clinical data and biomarkers to predict treatment response and monitor for disease recurrence. Varied reimbursement policies across Europe underscore the need for updated guidelines and broader immunotherapy access. Conclusions: Management recommendations include standardized use of immunotherapy as the preferred treatment approach due to its tolerability and efficacy. This informs the future treatment landscape direction and supports the need for long-term clinical data on immunotherapy use.
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.