ArticleOncology letters2025
Risk score model for predicting local control and survival in patients with rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Article in Oncology letters, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate clinicopathological factors affecting local recurrence and survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and to create a risk-scoring model predicting local control (LC) and survival. The clinical and pathological data of 115 patients who received nCRT for LARC between February 2010 and December 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. A risk-scoring model was developed to predict LC and survival using statistically significant prognostic factors in univariate and multivariate analyses. In the multivariate analysis, the LC rate was improved in patients with a good pathological response to nCRT. By contrast, the disease-free survival (DFS) rate was significantly worse in patients with perineural invasion (PNI). The overall survival (OS) rate was significantly worse in patients who were >60 years of age, who had tumors ≥5 cm, who were PNI-positive and who had pathological N2 stage disease. Patients were grouped to analyze the ability of the scoring system to predict LC and survival. The total score was derived by assigning points to the prognostic factors in univariate and multivariate analyses and was subsequently divided into three groups according to tertile. The median LC times in groups 1-3 were significantly different at 143.6, 97.2 and 93.6 months, respectively. The median DFS times in groups 1-3 were significantly different at 136.1, 108.5 and 67.2 months, respectively, while the median OS times in groups 1-3 were significantly different at 138.3, 87.2 and 64.6 months, respectively. In conclusion, risk score modeling with prognostic factors effectively determined the difference in LC and survival between the groups. Adding effective systemic therapy to nCRT may improve results, especially in patients with multiple poor prognostic factors, including larger tumors, PNI and multiple nodal involvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.