↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of Clinical Complete Response After Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer with Digital Rectal Examination, Endoscopy, and MRI: Selection for Organ-Saving Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
287 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of Clinical Complete Response After Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer with Digital Rectal Examination, Endoscopy, and MRI: Selection for Organ-Saving Treatment
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, July 2015
DOI 10.1245/s10434-015-4687-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monique Maas, Doenja M. J. Lambregts, Patty J. Nelemans, Luc A. Heijnen, Milou H. Martens, Jeroen W. A. Leijtens, Meindert Sosef, Karel W. E. Hulsewé, Christiaan Hoff, Stephanie O. Breukink, Laurents Stassen, Regina G. H. Beets-Tan, Geerard L. Beets

Abstract

The response to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer can be assessed by clinical examination, consisting of digital rectal examination (DRE) and endoscopy, and by MRI. A high accuracy is required to select complete response (CR) for organ-preserving treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of clinical examination (endoscopy with or without biopsy and DRE), T2W-MRI, and diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) for the detection of CR after CRT. This prospective cohort study in a university hospital recruited 50 patients who underwent clinical assessment (DRE, endoscopy with or without biopsy), T2W-MRI, and DWI at 6-8 weeks after CRT. Confidence levels were used to score the likelihood of CR. The reference standard was histopathology or recurrence-free interval of >12 months in cases of wait-and-see approaches. Diagnostic performance was calculated by area under the receiver operator characteristics curve, with corresponding sensitivities and specificities. Strategies were assessed and compared by use of likelihood ratios. Seventeen (34 %) of 50 patients had a CR. Areas under the curve were 0.88 (0.78-1.00) for clinical assessment and 0.79 (0.66-0.92) for T2W-MRI and DWI. Combining the modalities led to a posttest probability for predicting a CR of 98 %. Conversely, when all modalities indicated residual tumor, 15 % of patients still experienced CR. Clinical assessment after CRT is the single most accurate modality for identification of CR after CRT. Addition of MRI with DWI further improves the diagnostic performance, and the combination can be recommended as the optimal strategy for a safe and accurate selection of CR after CRT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 197 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 35 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 12%
Student > Master 19 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 9%
Other 45 22%
Unknown 43 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 3%
Engineering 5 2%
Environmental Science 3 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 1%
Other 13 6%
Unknown 58 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,865,579
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#381
of 6,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,624
of 263,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#6
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.