Back

A Tale of Two Countries: Comparison of Rectal Cancer Characteristics Between Pakistani Americans and Native Pakistanis

Sherwani, M.; Azhar, M. K.; Khan, S.; Ali, D.; Husain, S.; Khan, A.

2026-04-11 surgery
10.64898/2026.04.07.26350364 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionComparison of rectal cancer characteristics in Pakistani Americans and native Pakistanis remains poorly investigated, as migrant studies have predominantly concentrated on East and Southeast Asian groups. This research aims to compare clinicopathological characteristics between the two groups. We hypothesize that significant differences will exist between these cohorts, mediated by gene-environment interactions. MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study utilizing two multi-institutional databases to identify adult patients with rectal cancer: the National Cancer Database in the U.S (2018-2022) and the Rectal Cancer Surgery and Epidemiology Study in Pakistan (2020-2021). Non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) were included as a reference population for comparative analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square tests. ResultsA total of 523 Pakistani Americans and 608 native Pakistanis were included in the study. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years in Pakistani Americans (IQR 48-68), 42 years (IQR 33-54) in native Pakistanis and 63 years in NHWs (IQR 54-73) (p < 0.001). Native Pakistanis presented with early-stage disease less often than Pakistani Americans and NHWs (5.3%, 25.1%, and 20.5%, respectively; p < 0.001) and had markedly higher rates of signet cell carcinoma (20.1%, 0.6%, and 0.4%, respectively; p < 0.001) and poorly differentiated tumors (29.0%, 10.4%, and 11.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). ConclusionsThis study found that Native Pakistanis with rectal cancer presented at a younger age and with more aggressive tumor characteristics compared to both Pakistani Americans and NHWs. Notably, Pakistani Americans displayed a distinct clinical profile, intermediate between both groups.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.