ArticleThoracic cancer2015
Prognostic significance of the pN classification supplemented by body mass index for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of high body mass index on surgical outcomes and long-term survival among patients undergoing esophagectomy: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Comparison of postoperative complications between different operation methods for esophageal cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2019Article
- Obesity as a surgical risk factor.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2018Review
- Does postoperative morbidity worsen the oncological outcome after radical surgery for gastrointestinal cancers? A systematic review of the literature.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2017Review
- AKAP4 mediated tumor malignancy in esophageal cancer.American journal of translational research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBody mass index (BMI) has been associated with the risk of esophageal cancer. But the influence of BMI on postoperative complications and prognosis has always been controversial.
methodsBetween 2000 and 2007, 424 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) underwent R0 esophagectomy at our center without neoadjuvant therapy. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify prognostic factors for survival.
resultsPatients were divided into three groups according to Asian-specific BMI cut-off value: underweight (n = 45), normal weight (n = 228), and overweight and obese (n = 151). Mean follow-up time was 39 months. The five-year overall survival (OS) rate was 19%, 34%, and 42% for underweight, normal weight, and overweight and obese, respectively (P < 0.001). The five-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 24%, 41%, and 74% for underweight, normal weight, and overweight and obese, respectively (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that pT, pN, and BMI were independent prognostic factors for DFS and OS. The C-index to the combined model showed improved predictive ability when compared to the pN classification (0.779 vs. 0.734).
conclusionPreoperative BMI was an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS. The proposed new prognostic model with the pN classification supplemented by BMI might improve the ability to discriminate ESCC patients' outcome.
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.