The DOI matches its Crossref record; 83 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the Western world. Apart from surgery - which remains the mainstay of treatment for resectable primary tumours - postoperative (i.e., adjuvant) chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based regimens is now the standard treatment in Dukes' C (TNM stage III) colon tumours i.e. tumours with metastases in the regional lymph nodes but no distant metastases. In contrast, the evidence for recommendations of adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer is sparse. In Europe it is generally acknowledged that locally advanced rectal tumours receive preoperative (i.e., neoadjuvant) downstaging by radiotherapy (or chemoradiotion), whereas in the US postoperative chemoradiotion is considered the treatment of choice in all Dukes' C rectal cancers. Overall, no universal consensus exists on the adjuvant treatment of surgically resectable rectal carcinoma; moreover, no formal systematic review and meta-analysis has been so far performed on this subject. OBJECTIVES: We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature from 1975 until March 2011 in order to quantitatively summarize the available evidence regarding the impact of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on the survival of patients with surgically resectable rectal cancer. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). SEARCH METHODS: CCCG standard search strategy in defined databases with the following supplementary search. 1. Rect* or colorect* - 2. Cancer or carcinom* or adenocarc* or neoplasm* or tumour - 3. Adjuv* - 4. Chemother* - 5. Postoper* SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer who received no adjuvant chemotherapy with those receiving any postoperative chemotherapy regimen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data and a third author performed an independent search for verification. The main outcome measure was the hazard ratio (HR) between the risk of event between the treatment arm (adjuvant chemotherapy) and the control arm (no adjuvant chemotherapy). The survival data were either entered directly in RevMan or extrapolated from Kaplan-Meier plots and then entered in RevMan. Due to expected clinical heterogeneity a random effects model was used for creating the pooled estimates of treatment efficacy. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 21 eligible RCTs were identified and used for meta-analysis purposes. Overall, 16,215 patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled, 9,785 being affected with rectal carcinoma. Considering patients with rectal cancer only, 4,854 cases were randomized to receive potentially curative surgery of the primary tumour plus adjuvant chemotherapy and 4,367 to receive surgery plus observation. The mean number of patients enrolled was 466 (range: 54-1,243 cases). 11 RCTs had been performed in Western countries and 10 in Japan. All trials used fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy (no modern drugs - such as oxaliplatin, irinotecan or biological agents - were tested).Overall survival (OS) data were available in 21 RCTs and the data available for meta-analysis regarded 9,221 patients: of these, 4854 patients were randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,367 patients did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a significant reduction in the risk of death (17%) among patients undergoing postoperative chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.83, CI: 0.76-0.91). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=30%) but significant (P=0.09) at the 10% alpha level.Disease-free survival (DFS) data were reported in 20 RCTs, and the data suitable for meta-analysis included 8,530 patients. Of these, 4,515 patients were randomized to postoperative chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,015 patients received no postoperative chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a reduction in the risk of disease recurrence (25%) among patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.75, CI: 0.68-0.83). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=41%) but significant (P=0.03).While analyzing both OS and DFS data, sensitivity analyses did not find any difference in treatment effect based on trial sample size or geographical region (Western vs Japanese). Available data were insufficient to investigate on the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy separately in different TNM stages in terms of both OS and DFS. No plausible source of heterogeneity was formally identified, although variability in treatment regimens and TNM stages of enrolled patients might have played a significant role in the difference of reported results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis support the use of 5-FU based postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients undergoing apparently radical surgery for non-metastatic rectal carcinoma. Av
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection
Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 · Cited by 30,033
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Wang, G., Ma, R., Qiao, G., Wada, K., Aizawa, Y., & Satoh, T. (2015) · Integrative Medicine International · doi:10.1159/000368408 · Cited by 18,657
Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., Filiberti, A., Flechtner, H., Fleishman, S. B., Haes, J. C. J. M. D., et al. (1993) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/85.5.365 · Cited by 16,005
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Cited by
Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Glynne-Jones, R., Wyrwicz, L., Tiret, E., Brown, G., Rödel, C., Cervantes, A., & Arnold, D. (2017) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx224 · Cited by 2,046
Bosset, J.-F., Calais, G., Mineur, L., Maingon, P., Stojanovic-Rundic, S., Bensadoun, R.-J., Bardet, E., Beny, A., Ollier, J.-C., Bolla, M., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70599-0 · Cited by 730
Breugom, A. J., van Gijn, W., Muller, E. W., Berglund, Å., van den Broek, C. B. M., Fokstuen, T., Gelderblom, H., Kapiteijn, E., Leer, J. W. H., Marijnen, C. A. M., et al. (2015) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdu560 · Cited by 391
Nilsson, P. J., van Etten, B., Hospers, G. A., Påhlman, L., van de Velde, C. J., Beets-Tan, R. G., Blomqvist, L., Beukema, J. C., Kapiteijn, E., Marijnen, C. A., et al. (2013) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/1471-2407-13-279 · Cited by 293
Metadata
- Authors
- Petersen, S. H., Harling, H., Kirkeby, L. T., Wille-Jørgensen, P., & Mocellin, S.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-03-14
- Volume
- 2012
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- CD004078-CD004078
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W2121294912
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 83
- FWCI
- 13.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd004078.pub2
- The paper
- Petersen, S. H., Harling, H., Kirkeby, L. T., Wille-Jørgensen, P., & Mocellin, S. (2012). Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004078.pub2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.