Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Medicina · September 29, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background and Objectives: Rectal cancer management has changed substantially over the past two decades. We evaluated 20-year trends in stage at diagnosis, treatment patterns, and survival at a Lithuanian tertiary referral centre. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 839 patients who underwent resection for stage I–III rectal cancer between 2004 and 2023, divided into two periods: 2004–2013 (n = 426) and 2014–2023 (n = 413). Survival was analysed with Kaplan–Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression, truncated at 60 months. Results: Patients in the later cohort were diagnosed at an earlier clinical stage (stage I: 12.6% vs. 2.4%) and more often received neoadjuvant or perioperative therapy (55.2% vs. 37.1%; p < 0.001). Among clinical stage III patients, receipt of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or total neoadjuvant treatment rose from 15.9% to 70.9% (p < 0.001), while pathological complete response among treated patients remained stable (10.8% vs. 10.7%; p = 0.98). Five-year overall survival increased from 64.8% to 71.3% (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60–0.99; p = 0.039) and cancer-specific survival from 70.4% to 80.8% (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.45–0.80; p = 0.0005). The cohort effect persisted after multivariable adjustment for CSS (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45–0.85; p = 0.003), with clinical stage explaining only ~13% of the crude effect; stage III sensitivity analysis confirmed the CSS gain (67.9% to 77.3%; p = 0.009). Conclusions: Cancer-specific survival improved substantially and independently of stage migration. The gain coincided with markedly wider and better-targeted delivery of effective neoadjuvant therapy rather than with improved per-patient tumour responsiveness. As an observational comparison of two historical cohorts, this study demonstrates association rather than causation; nonetheless, it provides real-world evidence consistent with the hypothesis that systematic implementation of evidence-based rectal cancer pathways translates into measurable survival benefit.