SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2018
The role of definitive chemoradiotherapy versus surgery as initial treatments for potentially resectable esophageal carcinoma.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unveiling Therapeutic Targets for Esophageal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Esophageal cancer practice guidelines 2022 edited by the Japan esophageal society: part 1.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2023Article
- Effect of different surgical approaches on the prognosis of patients with postoperative radiotherapy for stage IIB-IVA esophageal squamous cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- It's not always too late: a case for minimally invasive salvage esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Letter to the Editor: Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Versus Trimodality Therapy for Resectable Oesophageal Carcinoma: Meta-analyses and Systematic Review of Literature.World journal of surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) and esophagectomy as initial treatments for potentially resectable esophageal cancer.
methodsTo assess both strategies, the combined odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Thirteen studies (N = 2071; dCRT = 869 and surgery = 1202) were included. In all, 90.39% of the patients were diagnosed with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).
resultsThe 2-year (OR = 1.199, 95% CI 0.922-1.560; P = 0.177) and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates (OR = 0.947, 95% CI 0.628-1.429; P = 0.796) were not significantly different. No significant differences were identified in the 2-year OS among patients with stage I disease (OR = 1.397, 95% CI 0.740-2.638; P = 0.303) or stage II-III (OR = 0.418, 95% CI 0.022-7.833; P = 0.560). Patients with lymph node metastases tended to have a better 5-year OS when treated with dCRT than with surgery (OR = 0.226, 95% CI 0.044-1.169; P = 0.076); however, the difference between the two methods was not significant. Western patients who received dCRT had poorer prognoses than patients who underwent surgery (OR = 1.522, 95% CI 1.035-2.238; P = 0.033). dCRT and surgery led to similar 5-year progression-free survival rates (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.79-1.42; P = 0.70).
conclusionsdCRT and surgery are equally effective as initial treatments for potentially resectable esophageal cancer. These results apply primarily to Asian populations as they have an increased incidence of ESCC.
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.