ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2012
Screening for oesophageal cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 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
79 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 156 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cumulative evidence for association between genetic polymorphisms and esophageal cancer susceptibility: A review with evidence from meta-analysis and genome-wide association studies.Cancer medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Association between alcohol dehydrogenase-2 gene polymorphism and esophageal cancer risk: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2016Pooled it
- Glutathione S-transferase M1 null genotype contributes to increased risk of esophageal carcinoma in Chinese population.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Pilot study of cytological testing for oesophageal squamous cell dysplasia in a high-risk area in Northern Iran.British journal of cancer · 2014Trial
- Observational
- Large-scale esophageal cancer screening through noncontrast computed tomography and artificial intelligence.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Using a mobile unit to deliver capsule sponge testing for Barrett's oesophagus in the community in England through GP invitation and self-referral: an implementation study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Comprehensive metabolic profiling uncovers early variation and biomarkers of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Science China. Life sciences · 2026Article
- An Extracellular Vesicle Protein-Based Machine Learning Framework for Early Detection of Oesophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Multicentre, Prospective Study.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2026Article
- Exploratory evaluation of magnetic capsule endoscopy with detachable-string for detecting esophageal lesions including early squamous cell carcinoma.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- p53 and Ki-67 combined with periodic acid-Schiff staining for the diagnosis of early stage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma lesions in biopsy specimens.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of Risk Prediction Models for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in the General Population.Gastro hep advances · 2025Review
- Global trends in esophageal cancer: sex and age disparities in health inequalities from 1990 to 2021, with projections to 2050.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence enhances the management of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the precision oncology era.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Analyzing risk factors and constructing a predictive model for superficial esophageal carcinoma with submucosal infiltration exceeding 200 micrometers.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Cancer Methylation Biomarker Detection in an Automated, Portable, Multichannel Magnetofluidic Platform.ACS nano · 2024Article
- Challenge and future of cancer screening in China: Insights from esophageal cancer screening practice.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2023Article
- Worldwide trends in esophageal cancer survival, by sub-site, morphology, and sex: an analysis of 696,974 adults diagnosed in 60 countries during 2000-2014 (CONCORD-3).Cancer communications (London, England) · 2023Article
- Professionals' views on the justification for esophageal adenocarcinoma screening: A systematic literature search and qualitative analysis.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Review
19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Abstract
Oesophageal cancer is a global health problem with high mortality due to the advanced nature of the disease at presentation; therefore, detection at an early stage significantly improves outcome. Oesophageal squamous-cell cancer is preceded by dysplasia and oesophageal adenocarcinoma is preceded by Barrett's oesophagus, which progresses to cancer via intermediate dysplastic stages. Screening to detect these preneoplastic lesions has the potential to substantially reduce mortality and morbidity. However, the risks and benefits of such programmes to individuals and to society need to be carefully weighed. Endoscopic screening is invasive, costly and error prone owing to sampling bias and the subjective diagnosis of dysplasia. Non-endoscopic cell-sampling methods are less invasive and more cost effective than endoscopy, but the sensitivity and specificity of cytological assessment of atypia has been disappointing. The use of biomarkers to analyse samples collected using pan-oesophageal cell-collection devices may improve diagnostic accuracy; however, further work is required to confirm this. The psychological and economic implications of screening as well as the feasibility of implementing such programmes must also be considered.
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.