Trial reportAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2017
Multimodality treatment for esophageal adenocarcinoma: multi-center propensity-score matched study.
Trial report in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global hotspots and trends in the application of neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapyWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2024Pooled it
- Neoadjuvant sintilimab and chemotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a phase II clinical trial.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Trial
- Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Overall Survival to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.BioMed research international · 2022Trial
- Article
- Comparison of surgical safety among different comprehensive treatment models for adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: a single-center cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Observational
- Prolonged Time to Surgery in Patients With Residual Disease After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.Annals of surgery · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant Treatment and Postoperative Complications After Surgery for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-Based, Nationwide Study in Finland.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Lymph node metastases status in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a single-center cross-sectional study.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Article
- History and evidence for state of the art of lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer surgery.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024Review
- Application of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in curative surgery for esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Long-Term Postsurgical Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation (CROSS) Versus Chemotherapy (FLOT) for Multimodal Treatment of Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus and the Esophagogastric Junction.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Facing adenocarcinoma of distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction: a CROSS versus FLOT propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcomes in a high-volume institution.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Today's Mistakes and Tomorrow's Wisdom in the Surgical Treatment of Barrett's Adenocarcinoma.Visceral medicine · 2022Review
- Short-term outcome of Ivor Lewis esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus perioperative chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study from the National Cancer Center in China.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Transhiatal esophagectomy as a treatment for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: postoperative and oncologic results of a single-center cohort THE for locally advanced GEJC.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer: a population-based analysis.International journal of clinical oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The primary aim of this study was to compare survival from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (NCRS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (NCS) for the treatment of esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. The secondary aims were to compare pathological effects, short-term mortality and morbidity, and to evaluate the effect of lymph node harvest upon survival in both treatment groups. Methods: Data were collected from 10 European centers from 2001 to 2012. Six hundred and eight patients with stage II or III oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junctional adenocarcinoma were included; 301 in the NCRS group and 307 in the NCS group. Propensity score matching and Cox regression analyses were used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics. Results: NCRS resulted in significant pathological benefits with more ypT0 (26.7% versus 5%; P < 0.001), more ypN0 (63.3% versus 32.1%; P < 0.001), and reduced R1/2 resection margins (7.7% versus 21.8%; P < 0.001). Analysis of short-term outcomes showed no statistically significant differences in 30-day or 90-day mortality, but increased incidence of anastomotic leak (23.1% versus 6.8%; P < 0.001) in NCRS patients. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in 3-year overall survival (57.9% versus 53.4%; Hazard Ratio (HR)= 0.89, 95%C.I. 0.67-1.17, P = 0.391) nor disease-free survival (52.9% versus 48.9%; HR = 0.90, 95%C.I. 0.69-1.18, P = 0.443). The pattern of recurrence was also similar (P = 0.660). There was a higher lymph node harvest in the NCS group (27 versus 14; P < 0.001), which was significantly associated with a lower recurrence rate and improved disease free survival within the NCS group. Conclusion: The survival differences between NCRS and NCS maybe modest, if present at all, for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. Future large-scale randomized trials must control and monitor indicators of the quality of surgery, as the extent of lymphadenectomy appears to influence prognosis in patients treated with NCS, from this large multi-center European study.
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.