Evidence mapPaperPMID 32923389Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2020

Delivery of Personalized Care for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Incorporating Pathological, Molecular Genetic, and Immunological Biomarkers Into the Multimodal Paradigm.

Éanna J Ryan, Ben Creavin, Kieran Sheahan

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07314528 (A Phase II Multi-institutional Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Combination With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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.

NCT07314528 phase2not yet recruitingstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

A Phase II Multi-institutional Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Combination With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Ran2026Enrolled42Registered outcomes23Posted comparisons0ConditionsGLP-1, Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC), Obesity &Amp; Overweight, Rectal Cancer PatientsArmsGLP-1 receptor agonist, Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT)
Open the trial in the graph
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Éanna J RyanSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Ben CreavinSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Kieran SheahanSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
University College Dublin · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately one-third of all newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) is composed of rectal cancer, with the incidence rising in younger patients. The principal neoadjuvant treatments consist of neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiation. Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is particularly challenging to manage given the anatomical constrictions of the pelvis and the risk for local recurrence. In appropriately treated patients, 5- and 10-year overall survival is estimated at 60 and 50%, respectively. The prognosis for LARC has improved in recent years with more access to screening, advances in surgical techniques, and perioperative care. Furthermore, the refinement of the multidisciplinary team with combined-modality management strategies has improved outcomes. These advancements have been augmented by significant improvements in the understanding of the underlying tumor biology. However, there are many instances where patient outcomes do not match those for their tumor stage and accurate prognostic information for individual patients can be difficult to estimate owing to the heterogeneous nature of LARC. Many new combinations of chemotherapy with radiotherapy, including total neoadjuvant therapy with targeted therapies that aim to diminish toxicity and increase survival, are being evaluated in clinical trials. Despite these advances, local recurrence and distant metastasis remain an issue, with one-third of LARC patients dying within 5 years of initial treatment. Although much of the new pathological, molecular genetics, and immunological biomarkers allow refinement in the classification and prognostication of CRC, the relative importance of each of these factors with regards to the development and progression of LARC remains incompletely understood. These factors are often insufficiently validated and seldom consider the individual characteristics of the host, the tumor and its location, the local available expertise, or the probable location of recurrence. Appreciating the mechanisms behind these differences will allow for a more comprehensive, personalized approach and more informed treatment options, leading to ultimately superior outcomes. This review aims to first outline the current multidisciplinary context in which LARC care should be delivered and then discuss how some key prognosticators, including novel histopathological, molecular genetics, and immunological biomarkers, might fit into the wider context of personalized LARC management in the coming years.

Indexed as

chemotherapymesorectal excisionpersonalized medicineprognostic markersradiationrectal cancersurvival

Identifiers

PMID32923389
PMCPMC7456909
OpenAlexW3049048287

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.