Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27747003›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2016

Positive esophageal proximal resection margin: an important prognostic factor for esophageal cancer that warrants adjuvant therapy.

Yun-Cang Wang, Han-Yu Deng, Wen-Ping Wang, Du He, Peng-Zhi Ni, Wei-Peng Hu, Zhi-Qiang Wang, Long-Qi Chen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yun-Cang WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;; Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050031, China.
Han-Yu DengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Wen-Ping WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Du HeDepartment of Pathology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Peng-Zhi NiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Wei-Peng HuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Zhi-Qiang WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Long-Qi ChenDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
West China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNSichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPositive esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM+) following esophagectomy was considered as incomplete or R1 resection. The clinicopathological data and long-term prognosis of esophageal cancer (EC) patients with ERM+ after esophagectomy were still unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the clinical significance of ERM+ and its therapeutic option.

methodsFrom November 2008 to December 2014, 3,594 patients with histologically confirmed EC underwent radical resection in our department. Among them there were 37 patients (1.03%) who had ERM+. ERM+ was defined as carcinoma or atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) at the residual esophageal margin in our study. For comparison, another 74 patients with negative esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM-) were propensity-matched at a ratio of 1:2 as control group according to sex, age, tumor location and TNM staging. The relevant prognostic factors were investigated by univariate and multivariate regression analysis.

resultsIn this large cohort of patients, the rate of ERM+ was 1.03%. The median survival time was 35.000 months in patients with ERM+, significantly worse than 68.000 months in those with ERM- (Chi-square =4.064, P=0.044). Survival in patients with esophageal residual atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) was similar to those with esophageal residual carcinoma. Survival rate in stage I-II was higher than that in stage III-IV (Chi-square =27.598, P=0.000) in ERM-; But there was no difference between the two subgroups of patients in ERM+. Furthermore, in those patients with ERM+, survival was better in those who having adjuvant therapy, compared to those without adjuvant therapy (Chi-square =5.480, P=0.019). And the average survival time which was improved to a well situation for ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was 68.556 months which is comparable to average survival time (65.815 months) of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages.

conclusionsERM+ after esophagectomy nowadays is of low incidence but still an important prognostic factor for patients with EC. Survival of ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was improved to a well situation which is comparable to overall survival (OS) rate of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages.

Indexed as

Esophageal carcinoma (EC)positive resection marginprognosistherapy

Identifiers

PMID27747003
PMCPMC5059297
OpenAlexW2516861330

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.