Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28983229›Full record

ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2017

Inter-evaluator heterogeneity of clinical diagnosis for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Yasuo Hamamoto, Masanori Nojima, Yu Aoki, Takeshi Suzuki, Kenta Kawasaki, Kenro Hirata, Yasutaka Sukawa, Akira Kasuga, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Hiroya Takeuchi and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Treatment selection for esophageal cancer: evaluation from a nationwide database.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2018
    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

14 authors.

Yasuo HamamotoKeio Cancer Center, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Masanori NojimaCenter for Translational Research, The Institute of Medical Science Hospital, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yu AokiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi SuzukiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Kenta KawasakiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Kenro HirataDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Yasutaka SukawaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Akira KasugaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Hirofumi KawakuboDivision of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroya TakeuchiDivision of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Koji MurakamiDepartment of Radiology, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiromasa TakaishiDivision of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Takanori KanaiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuko KitagawaDivision of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjukuku, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdentifying clinical resectability of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is important, although inter-evaluator heterogeneity (IEH) could exist, especially in borderline resectable (BLR) cases. To investigate the extent of heterogeneity, we conducted clinical diagnostic imaging questionnaires. MATERIALS AND

methodsFive cases with clinical T3 or T4 cases, which were treated with neo-adjuvant triplet chemotherapy followed by surgery, were selected as the model. These cases were divided into two groups: curative resected cases (#1-#3) and non-curative resected cases (#4 and #5). Only imaging slides were shown without any information about patient characteristics or clinical course. The evaluators consisted of surgeons (staff and non-staff), medical oncologists, and an imaging radiologist; a total of 25 medical staff answered the questionnaire. Two questions (1: clinical T stage before chemotherapy, 2: resectability after chemotherapy) were answered. Occupational differences were assessed by comparing the results to the imaging radiologist.

resultsIEH was observed for clinical diagnosis before chemotherapy in one case (clinical T4: 52%, clinical T3: 48%). In the other cases, most evaluators diagnosed them as clinical T4, with 76-88% agreement. IEH for clinical resectability after chemotherapy was relatively small. Occupational IEH was observed in both before and after chemotherapy.

conclusionIEH in decisions about treating BLR cases in ESCC should be considered in clinical practice. Multi-disciplinary teams are essential to overcome this problem.

Indexed as

Esophageal cancerHeterogeneityResectability

Identifiers

PMID28983229
PMCPMC5603637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.