ReviewSurgery today2011
The significance of lymph node status as a prognostic factor for esophageal cancer.
Review in Surgery today, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of indocyanine green and near-infrared fluorescence in the detection of metastatic lymph nodes during oesophageal and gastric cancer resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the influence of a positive circumferential resection margin in oesophageal cancer.BJS open · 2019Pooled it
- Accuracy of sentinel node biopsy in esophageal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the pertinent literature.Surgery today · 2014Pooled it
- Prognostic value of left gastric artery lymph node metastasis in patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Three-field vs two-field lymphadenectomy in thoracic ESCC patients: a multicenter randomized study (NST 1503).Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2025Article
- Semaphorin 3F (SEMA3F) influences patient survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical Significance of Intramural Metastasis as an Independent Prognostic Factor in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of prognostic factors of esophageal cancer between a Chinese cohort and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Article
- Machine learning models predict lymph node metastasis in patients with stage T1-T2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- A modified survival model for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma based on lymph nodes: A study based on SEER database and external validation.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Effect of perioperative flurbiprofen axetil on long-term survival of patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy: A retrospective study.Journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Lymph Node Involvement in Oesophageal Carcinoma: A Single-Centre Observational Study From Western India.Cureus · 2021Article
- Risk factors for lymph node metastasis of the left recurrent laryngeal nerve in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Importance of investigating high-risk human papillomavirus in lymph node metastasis of esophageal adenocarcinoma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Review
- Current status and future direction of lymph node dissection in radical surgery for esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Improved detection of metastatic lymph nodes in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma by combined interpretation of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2019Article
- The MR radiomic signature can predict preoperative lymph node metastasis in patients with esophageal cancer.European radiology · 2019Observational
- Olfactomedin 4 (OLFM4) expression is associated with nodal metastases in esophageal adenocarcinoma.PloS one · 2019Article
- Elucidation of the Anatomical Mechanism of Nodal Skip Metastasis in Superficial Thoracic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2018Article
- Comparison of two major staging systems of esophageal cancer-toward more practical common scale for tumor staging.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The revision of the TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors, 7th Edition, suggests the lymph node (LN) status to be the most significant risk factor in esophageal cancer. This article reviews the current status of LNs as indicators of prognosis. The significance of the number of metastatic LNs, the number of resected LNs, and a novel index, the "LN ratio" (metastatic LNs/removed LNs) in patients with esophageal cancer, were reviewed. The number of metastatic LNs independently predicted the prognosis of both overall survival and relapse-free survival. The number of positive LNs was also the best predictive marker of survival. Furthermore, overall survival significantly depended on the number of surgically removed LNs, and the LN ratio closely correlated with survival. The LN status is considered to be the most significant information that can be used to predict the prognosis. However, there are many issues that still need to be resolved. Better knowledge of the N-status is therefore needed to effectively utilize this information. Further research should focus on the N-status of patients with esophageal cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.