ArticleSurgery today2014
Clinical and oncological effects of triplet chemotherapy followed by radical esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer associated with unfavorable prognostic factors.
Article in Surgery today, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Current status of and perspectives regarding neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Surgery today · 2016Review
- Article
- Esophageal cancer: A Review of epidemiology, pathogenesis, staging workup and treatment modalities.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the hypothesis that the survival of patients undergoing R0 resection after triplet chemotherapy for resectable esophageal cancer with unfavorable prognostic factors (Category 3) would be similar to that of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer without such factors (Category 1).
methodsPatients with Category 3 tumors were assigned to receive triplet chemotherapy consisting of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin and nedaplatin (FAN) followed by radical esophagectomy. The outcomes of the bimodality treatment for Category 3 patients (n = 25) were compared with those of Category 1 patients (n = 41) in a prospective cohort study.
resultsGrade 3 or higher toxicity developed during chemotherapy in 32 % of the Category 3 patients, with no treatment-related deaths. No significant difference was detected in the surgery-related mortality and morbidity rates between the two groups. The recurrence-free survival was significantly worse in Category 3 than in Category 1 patients (p = 0.002), although the overall survival was not significantly different (p = 0.085) between the two groups in cases of R0 resection (5-year survival rates: 34.4 vs. 66.5 %).
conclusionsAlthough FAN chemotherapy followed by radical esophagectomy can be safely performed, this treatment modality may not have sufficient power to cure Category 3 disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23963503What 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.