Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38896374›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024

Prognostic analysis of rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: different prognostic factors in patients with different TRGs.

Yuan-Ling Tang, Dan-Dan Li, Jia-Yu Duan, Xin Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Yuan-Ling TangDivision of Abdominal Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Biological Therapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Wuhou District, Chengdu City, 610041, Sichuan Province, China.
Dan-Dan LiDivision of Abdominal Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Biological Therapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Wuhou District, Chengdu City, 610041, Sichuan Province, China.
Jia-Yu DuanDivision of Abdominal Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Biological Therapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Wuhou District, Chengdu City, 610041, Sichuan Province, China.
Xin WangDivision of Abdominal Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Biological Therapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Wuhou District, Chengdu City, 610041, Sichuan Province, China. wangxin@wchscu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe extent of tumor regression varies widely among locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). The purpose of this retrospectively study is to assess prognostic factors in LARC patients with NCRT, and further to analyze survival outcomes in patients with different tumor regression grades (TRGs).

methodsThis study includes LARC patients who underwent NCRT and TME at our institution. We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics and survival of all patients, and performed subgroup analysis for patients with different TRGs. Survival differences were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log rank test. Additionally, a multiple Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify independent prognostic factors.

resultsThe study included 393 patients, with 21.1%, 26.5%, 45.5%, and 6.9% achieving TRG 0, TRG 1, TRG 2, and TRG 3, respectively. The overall survival (OS) rate and disease-free survival (DFS) rate for all patients were 89.4% and 70.7%, respectively. Patients who achieved TRG 0-3 had different 5-year OS rates (96.9%, 91.1%, 85.2%, and 68.8%, P = 0.001) and 5-year DFS rates (80.8%, 72.4%, 67.0%, 55.8%, P = 0.031), respectively. Multivariate analyses showed that the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score was an independent prognostic indicator for both overall survival (OS) (HR = 4.040, 95% CI = 1.792-9.111, P = 0.001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 1.971, 95% CI = 1.478-2.628, P ˂ 0.001). In the subgroup analyses, the NAR score was found to be associated with DFS in patients with TRG 1 and TRG 2. After conducting multivariate analysis, it was found that ypT stage was a significant predictor of DFS for TRG 1 patients (HR = 4.384, 95% CI = 1.721-11.168, P = 0.002). On the other hand, ypN stage was identified as the dominant prognostic indicator of DFS for TRG 2 patients (HR = 2.795, 95% CI = 1.535-5.091, P = 0.001). However, none of these characteristics was found to be correlated with survival in patients with TRG 0 or TRG 3.

conclusionNAR score, in particular, appears to be the most powerful prognostic factor. It is important to consider various prognostic predictors for patients with different TRGs.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyRectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedChemoradiotherapyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapyNeoadjuvant rectal scoreRectal cancerTumor regression grade

Identifiers

PMID38896374
PMCPMC11186864

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.