ArticleBMC cancer2015
Long-term results of chemoradiotherapy for stage II-III thoracic esophageal cancer in a single institution after 2000 -with a focus on comparison of three protocols.
Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Esophageal cancer practice guidelines 2017 edited by the Japan esophageal society: part 2.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2019Guideline
- Predictors of Post-Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Esophageal Stricture in T2-T4 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: : A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adjuvant Nivolumab for Patients with Resected Esophageal Cancer or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer in France.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Article
- Clinical impact of radiation-induced myocardial damage detected by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and dose-volume histogram parameters of the left ventricle as prognostic factors of cardiac events after chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Impact of change in serum albumin level during and after chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2018Article
- Long-term results of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy using S-1 in the treatment of geriatric patients with esophageal cancer.OncoTargets and therapy · 2016Article
- Dose-Dependent Radiation-Induced Myocardial Damage in Esophageal Cancer Treated With Chemoradiotherapy: A Prospective Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the long-term results of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for stage II-III thoracic esophageal cancer mainly by comparing results of three protocols retrospectively.
methodsBetween 2000 and 2012, 298 patients with stage II-III thoracic esophageal cancer underwent CRT. Patients in Group A received two cycles of cisplatin (CDDP) at 70 mg/m(2) (day 1 and 29) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at 700 mg/m(2)/24 h (day 1-4 and 29-32) with radiotherapy (RT) of 60 Gy without a break. Patients in Group B received two cycles of CDDP at 40 mg/m(2) (day 1, 8, 36 and 43) and 5-FU at 400 mg/m(2)/24 h (day 1-5, 8-12, 36-40 and 43-47) with RT of 60 Gy with a 2-week break. Patients in Group C received two cycles of nedaplatin at 70 mg/m(2) (day 1 and 29) and 5-FU at 500 mg/m(2)/24 h (day 1-4 and 29-32) with RT of 60-70 Gy without a break. Differences in prognostic factors between the groups were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses.
resultsThe 5-year overall survival rates for patients in Group A, Group B and Group C were 52.4, 45.2 and 37.2%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates for patients in Stage II, Stage III (non-T4) and Stage III (T4) were 64.0, 40.1 and 22.5%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates for patients who received 1 cycle and 2 cycles of concomitant chemotherapy were 27.9 and 46.0%, respectively. In univariate analysis, stage, performance status and number of concomitant chemotherapy cycles were significant prognostic factors (p < 0.001, p = 0.008 and p < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, stage, protocol and number of concomitant chemotherapy cycles were significant factors (p < 0.001, p = 0.043 and p < 0.001, respectively).
conclusionsThe protocol used in Group A may be an effective protocol of CRT for esophageal cancer. It may be important to complete the scheduled concomitant chemotherapy with the appropriate intensity of CRT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.