Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 440

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial

Open access
Garcia-Aguilar, Julio, Renfro, Lindsay A, Chow, Oliver S, Shi, Qian, Carrero, Xiomara W, Lynn, Patricio B, Thomas, Charles R, Chan, Emily, Cataldo, Peter A, Marcet, Jorge E, Medich, David S, Johnson, Craig S, Oommen, Samuel C, Wolff, Bruce G, Pigazzi, Alessio, McNevin, Shane M, Pons, Roger K, Bleday, Ronald·2015·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

Summary Background Local excision is an organ-preserving treatment alternative for patients with stage I rectal cancer. However, local excision alone is associated with a high risk of local recurrence and inferior survival compared to transabdominal rectal resection. Here we investigate the oncologic and functional outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision for T2N0 rectal cancer. Methods This was a prospective, multi-institutional, single arm phase 2 trial for patients with clinically-staged T2N0 distal rectal cancer, treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisting of capecitabine (original dose 825mg/m2, twice daily, on days 1-14 and 22-35) , oxaliplatin (50mg/m2 weeks 1, 2, 4, 5), and radiation (5 days/week at 1.8 Gy/day for 5 weeks to a dose of 45 Gy, then a boost, for a total dose of 54 Gy) followed by local excision. Due to adverse events during chemoradiotherapy, the dose of capecitabine was reduced to 725 mg /m2, twice daily, 5 days/week, for 5 weeks, and the total dose of radiation to 50.4 Gy. Patients were followed at scheduled intervals and evaluated for recurrence and survival. Anorectal function (ARF) and quality of life (QOL) were assessed at baseline and one year after surgery, using validated instruments. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival for all eligible patients and for patients who completed chemotherapy and radiation, and had ypT0, ypT1, or ypT2 tumors, and negative resection margins. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00114231. Findings Seventy-nine eligible patients were accrued to the trial, and started nCRT. Three patients did not complete nCRT or LE per-protocol. Four additional patients completed protocol treatment, but one had a positive margin and three had ypT3 tumours. Median follow-up was 56 months. Of the 79 patients, five (6%) developed distant recurrence, and three (4%) recurred locally. All but two underwent salvage surgery. Three-year disease-free survival and overall survival for the entire group were 88% (0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.96) and 95% (95% CI: 0.90, 1.00), respectively. Overall 14 (29%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 gastrointestinal adverse events, 12 (16%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 pain as an adverse event, 12 (16%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 hematological adverse events, and 9 (11%) of 79 patients had grade 3 dermatologic adverse events during chemoradiation. Six (8%) of the 77 patients who had surgery had grade 3 pain, 3(4%) of 77 patients had grade 3-4 hemorrhage, 3 (4%) of 77 patients had gastrointestinal adverse events, 2 (3%) of 77 patients had infectious/febrile neutropenia, 2 (3%) of 77 patients had hematological adverse events, and one (1%) had neurological adverse events. The rectum was preserved in 72 of the 79 (91%) patients. ARF and QOL were unchanged one year after surgery compared to baseline. Interpretation Most patients with T2N0 rectal cancer treated with nCRT and LE achieved organ preservation without deterioration of their quality of life. The estimated 3-year DFS rate was within the defined margin of efficacy. Our data suggest that nCRT followed by LE may be considered as an organ-preserving alternative in carefully selected patients with clinically-staged T2N0 tumours who refuse, or are not candidates for, transabdominal resection.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00215-6

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 440

Metadata

Authors
Garcia-Aguilar, J., Renfro, L. A., Chow, O. S., Shi, Q., Carrero, X. W., Lynn, P. B., Thomas, C. R., Chan, E., Cataldo, P. A., Marcet, J. E., Medich, D. S., Johnson, C. S., Oommen, S. C., Wolff, B. G., Pigazzi, A., McNevin, S. M., Pons, R. K., & Bleday, R.
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
16
Issue
15
Pages
1537-1546
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1864574802
Cited by
440
References
23
FWCI
15.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00215-6
The paper
Garcia-Aguilar, J., Renfro, L. A., Chow, O. S., Shi, Q., Carrero, X. W., Lynn, P. B., Thomas, C. R., Chan, E., Cataldo, P. A., Marcet, J. E., Medich, D. S., Johnson, C. S., Oommen, S. C., Wolff, B. G., Pigazzi, A., McNevin, S. M., Pons, R. K., & Bleday, R. (2015). Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00215-6

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.