Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23224565›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2013

Preoperative therapy of esophagogastric cancer: the problem of nonresponding patients.

S Blank, A Stange, L Sisic, W Roth, L Grenacher, F Sterzing, M Burian, D Jäger, M Büchler, K Ott

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Importance of PET in surgery of esophageal cancer].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

S BlankDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, Heidelberg, Germany.
A Stange
L Sisic
W Roth
L Grenacher
F Sterzing
M Burian
D Jäger
M Büchler
K Ott

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPreoperative treatment is nowadays standard for locally advanced esophagogastric cancer in Europe. Surprisingly, little attention has been paid to nonresponders so far. The aim of our retrospective exploratory study was the comparison of responder, nonresponder, and primary resected patients in respect of outcome considering the tumor entity. PATIENTS AND

methodsFrom 2001-2011, 607 patients with locally advanced esophagogastric carcinoma (adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG), n = 293; squamous cell cancer (SCC), n = 111; gastric cancer, n = 203) after preoperative treatment (n = 281) or primary resection (n = 326) were included. Histopathological response evaluation (Becker criteria) was available for 263.

resultsA total of 76/263 (28.9 %) were responders (<10 % residual tumor). There was an association of response with increased R0 resections (p < 0.001) but also with a higher complication rate (p = 0.008) compared to nonresponse and primary surgery. Mortality was not influenced. Increased R0 resections after response were confirmed in every tumor entity (AEG, p = 0.010; SCC, p = 0.023; gastric cancer, p = 0.006). Median survival was best for responders with 43.5 months [95 % confidence interval (CI), 27.9-59.1], followed by nonresponders with 24.3 months (95 % CI, 21.6-27.0) and primary resected patients with 20.8 months (95 % CI, 17.7-23.9; p = 0.002). AEG (p = 0.012) and gastric cancer (p = 0.017) revealed identical results, but in the subgroup of SCC, the survival of nonresponders (median, 11.6 months; 95 % CI, 6.9-16.3) was even worse than for primary resected patients (median, 23.8 months; 95 % CI, 1.7-46.0; p = 0.012).

conclusionThe histopathological response rate was low. Generally, nonresponding patients with AEG or gastric cancer seem not to have a disadvantage compared to primary resected patients, but nonresponders with SCC have a worse prognosis, which strengthens the demand for a critical patient selection in surgery for this tumor entity.

Indexed as

Preoperative CareAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnalysis of VarianceCarcinoma, Squamous CellChemotherapy, AdjuvantEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHospital MortalityHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

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.