Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24409055›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013

Refining pathological evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

Fergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Adrian C Bateman, James P Byrne, Jamie J Kelly, Ian S Bailey, Donna M Sharland, Charlotte N Rees, Timothy J Iveson, Tim J Underwood and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Nodal Downstaging of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: Survival Analysis if ypN0 Is Achieved.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fergus NobleFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Luke NolanFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Adrian C BatemanFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
James P ByrneFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Jamie J KellyFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Ian S BaileyFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Donna M SharlandFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Charlotte N ReesFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Timothy J IvesonFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Tim J UnderwoodFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
Andrew R BatemanFergus Noble, Luke Nolan, Tim J Underwood, Andrew R Bateman, Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
University of Southampton · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UKMedical Research Council G1002565
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess tumour regression grade (TRG) and lymph node downstaging to help define patients who benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

methodsTwo hundred and eighteen consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastro-esophageal junction treated with surgery alone or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery between 2005 and 2011 at a single institution were reviewed. Triplet neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of platinum, fluoropyrimidine and anthracycline was considered for operable patients (World Health Organization performance status ≤ 2) with clinical stage T2-4 N0-1. Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was assessed using TRG, as described by Mandard et al. In addition lymph node downstaging was also assessed. Lymph node downstaging was defined by cN1 at diagnosis: assessed radiologically (computed tomography, positron emission tomography, endoscopic ultrasonography), then pathologically recorded as N0 after surgery; ypN0 if NAC given prior to surgery, or pN0 if surgery alone. Patients were followed up for 5 years post surgery. Recurrence was defined radiologically, with or without pathological confirmation. An association was examined between t TRG and lymph node downstaging with disease free survival (DFS) and a comprehensive range of clinicopathological characteristics.

resultsTwo hundred and eighteen patients underwent esophageal resection during the study interval with a mean follow up of 3 years (median follow up: 2.552, 95%CI: 2.022-3.081). There was a 1.8% (n = 4) inpatient mortality rate. One hundred and thirty-six (62.4%) patients received NAC, with 74.3% (n = 101) of patients demonstrating some signs of pathological tumour regression (TRG 1-4) and 5.9% (n = 8) having a complete pathological response. Forty four point one percent (n = 60) had downstaging of their nodal disease (cN1 to ypN0), compared to only 15.9% (n = 13) that underwent surgery alone (pre-operatively overstaged: cN1 to pN0), (P < 0.0001). Response to NAC was associated with significantly increased DFS (mean DFS; TRG 1-2: 5.1 years, 95%CI: 4.6-5.6 vs TRG 3-5: 2.8 years, 95%CI: 2.2-3.3, P < 0.0001). Nodal down-staging conferred a significant DFS advantage for those patients with a poor primary tumour response to NAC (median DFS; TRG 3-5 and nodal down-staging: 5.533 years, 95%CI: 3.558-7.531 vs TRG 3-5 and no nodal down-staging: 1.114 years, 95%CI: 0.961-1.267, P < 0.0001).

conclusionResponse to NAC in the primary tumour and in the lymph nodes are both independently associated with improved DFS.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyNeoadjuvant TherapyAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy, AdjuvantCisplatinDisease-Free SurvivalEndosonographyEnglandEpirubicinEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleFluorouracilCisplatinEpirubicinFluorouracilEsophageal cancerGastro-esophageal cancerNeoadjuvantRegression

Identifiers

PMID24409055
PMCPMC3882401
OpenAlexW2119255644

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.