ArticleBJS open2026
Oncological outcomes of direct versus delayed surgery after neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy for rectal cancer: national cohort study.
Article in BJS open, 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
Abstract
backgroundAfter the Stockholm III trial, a trend towards delayed surgery after neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy (5 × 5 Gy) for rectal cancer has emerged in Sweden, driven by the lower short-term complication rates and similar oncological outcomes. This study aimed to examine long-term oncological outcomes after neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy, comparing direct versus delayed surgery for rectal cancer in a real-world setting.
methodsA registry-based retrospective national cohort study was conducted using prospectively collected data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Patients with rectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy with surgery between 2016 and 2020 were analysed for oncological outcomes (local recurrence, distant metastasis) and overall survival at 3 years, comparing direct surgery, defined as surgery within 7 days after neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy, and delayed surgery, defined as surgery after 28-90 days. The rate of patients who underwent surgery within the delayed time frame of the Stockholm III trial was also recorded.
resultsA total of 2080 patients were identified, of whom 1208 (58.1%) underwent direct surgery and 872 had delayed surgery. Of note, only 288 patients underwent resection 28-56 days after neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy (within the time frame of the Stockholm III trial). Although the pathological complete response rate was higher in the delayed-surgery group compared with the direct-surgery group (6.5% versus 0.4%), 3-year local recurrence and distant metastasis rates were, respectively, 1.0% (12 patients) and 6.8% (82) in the direct-surgery group, and 3.4% (30) and 11.9% (104) in the delayed-surgery group. The adjusted hazard ratios for local recurrence and distant metastasis comparing delayed surgery with direct surgery were 3.60 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.75 to 7.39) and 2.17 (1.58 to 2.96), respectively, whereas the adjusted hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), favouring the direct-surgery group.
conclusionIn a real-world setting, the results indicate that few patients in the delayed-surgery group had surgery within the stipulated time frame. Considering this, delayed surgery was associated with a higher risk of local recurrence, distant metastasis, and reduced overall survival.
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.