Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152243›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus.

Cathy Bennett, Susi Green, John Decaestecker, Max Almond, Hugh Barr, Pradeep Bhandari, Krish Ragunath, Rajvinder Singh, Janusz Jankowski

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Surveillance in Barrett esophagus.Journal of medicine and life · 2014
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Cathy BennettCentre for Digestive Diseases, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK.
Susi Green
John Decaestecker
Max Almond
Hugh Barr
Pradeep Bhandari
Krish Ragunath
Rajvinder Singh
Janusz Jankowski
Gloucestershire Royal Hospital · GBQueen Alexandra Hospital · GBLeicester General Hospital · GBLyell McEwin Hospital · AUQueen Mary University of London · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GB

Funding

Department of Health 05/12/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBarrett's oesophagus is one of the most common pre-malignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little since the 1980s. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late-stage pre-malignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: that is conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

objectivesWe used data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery in people with Barrett's oesophagus, those with early neoplasias (defined as high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)). SEARCH

methodsWe used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify RCTs in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN, and LILACS, in July and August 2008. The searches were updated in 2009 and again in April 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies: RCTs comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately. TYPES OF

participantspatients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus.Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Reports of studies that meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9. MAIN

resultsWe did not identify any studies that met the inclusion criteria. In total we excluded 13 studies that were not RCTs but that compared surgery and endotherapies. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis Cochrane review has indicated that there are no RCTs to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites, standardising histopathology in all centres, assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study (i.e. long-term survival (over five or more years)) and no progression of HGD.

Indexed as

Barrett EsophagusEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagoscopyHumansPrecancerous Conditions

Identifiers

PMID23152243
OpenAlexW1701362171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.