Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28462649›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2017

Postoperative survival following perioperative MAGIC versus neoadjuvant OE02-type chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

A M Reece-Smith, J H Saunders, I N Soomro, C R Bowman, J P Duffy, P V Kaye, N T Welch, S Madhusudan, S L Parsons

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Oesophagogastric Surgery: a Systematic Review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

9 authors.

A M Reece-SmithNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
J H SaundersNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
I N SoomroNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
C R BowmanNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
J P DuffyNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
P V KayeNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
N T WelchNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
S MadhusudanNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.
S L ParsonsNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal management of resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma is controversial, with many centres using neoadjuvant chemotherapy following the Medical Research Council (MRC) oesophageal working group (OE02) trial and the MRC Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial. The more intensive MAGIC regimen is used primarily in gastric cancer but some also use it for oesophageal cancer. A database of cancer resections (2001-2013) provided information on survival of patients following either OE02 or MAGIC-type treatment. The data were compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Straight-to-surgery patients were also reviewed and divided into an 'early' cohort (2001-2006, OE02 era) and a 'late' cohort (2006-2013, MAGIC era) to estimate changes in survival over time. Subgroup analysis was performed for responders (tumour regression grade [TRG] 1-3) versus non-responders (TRG 4 and 5) and for anatomical site (gastro-oesophageal junction [GOJ] vs oesophagus). An OE02 regimen was used for 97 patients and 275 received a MAGIC regimen. Those in the MAGIC group were of a similar age to those undergoing OE02 chemotherapy but the proportion of oesophageal cancers was higher among MAGIC patients than among those receiving OE02 treatment. MAGIC patients had a significantly lower stage following chemotherapy than OE02 patients and a higher median overall survival although TRG was similar. On subgroup analysis, this survival benefit was maintained for GOJ and oesophageal cancer patients as well as non-responders. Analysis of responders showed no difference between regimens. 'Late' group straight-to-surgery patients were significantly older than those in the 'early' group. Survival, however, was not significantly different for these two cohorts. Although the original MAGIC trial comprised few oesophageal cancer cases, our patients had better survival with MAGIC than with OE02 chemotherapy in all anatomical subgroups, even though there was no significant change in operative survival over the time period in which these patients were treated. The use of the MAGIC regimen should therefore be encouraged in cases of operable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedAntineoplastic AgentsCohort StudiesEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm GradingAntineoplastic AgentsAdenocarcinomaKaplan–Meier estimateNeoadjuvant chemotherapyOesophageal neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID28462649
PMCPMC5449699

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.