ReviewDer Pathologe2012
[Update on Barrett esophagus and Barrett carcinoma].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Hospital volume effects in surgical treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a prospective multicenter observational study].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2017Observational
- Surgical resection of advanced gastric cancer following trastuzumab/oxaliplatin/capecitabine combination therapy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Article
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 definition of Barrett esophagus is currently under discussion. It is now suggested that a distal esophagus coated with cylinder epithelium with cardia-fundus mucosa should also be classified as Barrett esophagus because the risk of cancer is significantly increased even without histological evidence of intestinal metaplasia with goblet cells. The results of recent epidemiological investigations imply that the cancer risk of cylinder cell metaplasia and low grade intraepithelial neoplasia in Barrett esophagus has previously been overestimated. The histological detection of dysplasia still remains the best biomarker for estimation of the risk of cancer of Barrett esophagus. Exact determination of invasion depth in the mucosa, respective submucosa is now established as prognostic marker for overall survival in Patients with early carcinomas and this classification is useful for therapy decisions (endoscopic versus surgical removal). In advanced Barrett carcinoma following neoadjuvant therapy the lymph node status (ypN) is a better prognostic factor than the ypT category. In metastasized tumors therapies targeting HER2/new, EGFR or c-Met have been investigated explicitly in Barrett carcinoma only in phase I/II studies, whereby the predictive value of appropriate molecular pathology investigations is not yet reliably established.
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.