Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26203761›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2015

Patient-reported outcomes during and after definitive chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer.

J Rees, C N Hurt, S Gollins, S Mukherjee, T Maughan, S J Falk, J Staffurth, R Ray, N Bashir, J I Geh and 7 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Health-related quality of life after definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma: a population-based analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Treatment of Superficial Esophageal Cancer: An Update].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Neoadjuvant versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer : Outcomes and patterns of failure.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2018
    Article
  16. Oesophageal cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2017
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

17 authors.

J Rees1] Centre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK [2] Division of Surgery, Head and Neck, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
C N HurtWales Cancer Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
S GollinsNorth Wales Cancer Treatment Centre, Glan Clwyd Hospital, Rhyl, North Wales, UK.
S MukherjeeCRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
T MaughanCRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
S J FalkBristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
J StaffurthInstitute of Cancer and Genetics, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
R RayWales Cancer Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
N BashirWales Cancer Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
J I GehUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Birmingham, UK.
D CunninghamThe Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
R RoyQueen's Centre for Oncology and Haematology, Hull and East Yorkshire NHS Trust, Hull, UK.
J BridgewaterUCL Cancer Institute, London, UK.
G Griffiths1] Wales Cancer Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK [2] Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
L S NixonWales Cancer Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
J M Blazeby1] Centre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK [2] Division of Surgery, Head and Neck, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
T CrosbyVelindre Cancer Centre, Velindre Hospital, Cardiff, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15954Cancer Research UK 7256Cancer Research UK C20177/A7256Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLimited data describe patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of localised oesophageal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy(CRT). The phase 2/3 SCOPE-1 trial assessed the effectiveness of CRT±cetuximab. The trial for the first time provided an opportunity to describe PROs from a multi-centre group of patients treated with CRT that are presented here.

methodsPatients undergoing CRT±cetuximab within the SCOPE-1 trial (258 patients from 36 UK centres) completed generic-, disease- and treatment-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-OES18, Dermatology Life-Quality Index (DLQI)) at baseline and at 7, 13, 24, 52 and 104 weeks. Mean EORTC functional scale scores (>15 point change significant), DLQI scores (>4 point change significant) and proportions of patients (>15% significant) with 'minimal' or 'severe' symptoms are presented.

resultsQuestionnaire response rates were good. At baseline, EORTC functional scores were high (>75%) and few symptoms were reported except for severe problems with fatigue, insomnia and eating-related symptoms (e.g., appetite loss, dysphagia, dry mouth) in both groups(>15%). Functional aspects of health deteriorated and symptoms increased with treatment and by week 13 global quality of life, physical, role and social function significantly deteriorated and more problems with fatigue, dyspnoea, appetite loss and trouble with taste were reported. Recovery occurred by 6 months (except severe fatigue and insomnia in >15% of patients) and maintained at follow-up with no differences between groups.

conclusionsCRT for localised oesophageal cancer has a significant detrimental impact on many aspects of HRQL; however, recovery is achieved by 6 months and maintained with the exception of persisting problems with severe fatigue and insomnia. The data suggest that the HRQL recovery after definitive CRT is quicker, and there is little lasting deficit compared with treatment including surgery. These data need to be compared with HRQL data from studies evaluating treatments including surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCetuximabChemoradiotherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCetuximab

Identifiers

PMID26203761
PMCPMC4647690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.