ArticleThoracic cancer2018
Factors relevant to the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer who received intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of radiation esophagitis associated with daytime versus evening radiotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for esophageal cancer patients based on SEER Asian population.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- [Development and validation of a prognostic model based on SEER data for patients with esophageal carcinoma after esophagectomy].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2022Article
- Efficacy and Prognostic Analysis of 315 Stage I-IVa Esophageal Cancer Patients Treated with Simultaneous Integrated Boost-Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Prognostic Factors for Patients with Esophageal Cancer Receiving Definitive Radiotherapy Alone: A Retrospective Analysis.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Competing risk nomogram to predict cancer-specific survival in esophageal cancer during the intensity-modulated radiation therapy era: A single institute analysis.Oncology letters · 2020Article
- Value of long non-coding RNA Rpph1 in esophageal cancer and its effect on cancer cell sensitivity to radiotherapy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical factors relevant to the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer who received intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).
methodsThe data of 60 patients admitted to our hospital from January 2014 to December 2015 with pathologically confirmed esophageal cancer were retrospectively reviewed. All patients received IMRT. Patients were divided into groups according to two-year survival: those who survived > 2 years after treatment, and those who died within 2 years of treatment. The potential clinical factors relevant to prognosis were evaluated by logistic regression analysis.
resultsSingle factor analysis showed that lesion length (P < 0.05), tumor diameter (P < 0.05), T stage (P < 0.05), N stage (P < 0.05), and combined chemotherapy (P < 0.05) were associated with the prognosis of esophageal cancer patients who received IMRT. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that T stage (odds ratio = 3.62; P < 0.05) and N stage (odds ratio = 2.98; P < 0.05) were independent factors relevant to prognosis.
conclusionT stage and N stage influence the long-term curative effects of IMRT for esophageal cancer. The higher the stage, the lower the two-year survival rate.
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.