Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30165050›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology2018

Identification of Prognostic Phenotypes of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in 2 Independent Cohorts.

Tarek Sawas, Sarah Killcoyne, Prasad G Iyer, Kenneth K Wang, Thomas C Smyrk, John B Kisiel, Yi Qin, David A Ahlquist, Anil K Rustgi, Rui J Costa and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Magnitude and Time-Trend Analysis of Postendoscopy Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cellular Origins and Lineage Plasticity in Cancer.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Esophageal organoids: applications and future prospects.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  15. Improving outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
  16. Spatial biology of cancer evolution.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2023
    Review
  17. Cancer Risk in Barrett's Esophagus: A Clinical Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Tarek SawasDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Sarah KillcoyneMedical Research Council Cancer Unit, Hutchison/Medical Research Council Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Hinxton, United Kingdom.
Prasad G IyerDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Kenneth K WangDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Thomas C SmyrkDivision of Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
John B KisielDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Yi QinDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
David A AhlquistDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Anil K RustgiUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Rui J CostaEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Hinxton, United Kingdom.
Moritz GerstungEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Hinxton, United Kingdom.
Rebecca C FitzgeraldMedical Research Council Cancer Unit, Hutchison/Medical Research Council Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Electronic address: RCF29@MRC-CU.cam.ac.uk.
David A KatzkaDivisions of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
OCCAMS Consortium
Mayo Clinic · USEuropean Bioinformatics Institute · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15874Cancer Research UK 20406Cancer Research UK 23924Cancer Research UK 24430Cancer Research UK RG66287Medical Research Council MC_UU_12022/2Medical Research Council MR/M009157/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsMost patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) present with de novo tumors. Although this could be due to inadequate screening strategies, the precise reason for this observation is not clear. We compared survival of patients with prevalent EAC with and without synchronous Barrett esophagus (BE) with intestinal metaplasia (IM) at the time of EAC diagnosis.

methodsClinical data were studied using Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the effect of synchronous BE-IM on EAC survival independent of age, sex, TNM stage, and tumor location. We analyzed data from a cohort of patients with EAC from the Mayo Clinic (n=411; 203 with BE and IM) and a multicenter cohort from the United Kingdom (n=1417; 638 with BE and IM).

resultsIn the Mayo cohort, BE with IM had a reduced risk of death compared to patients without BE and IM (hazard ratio [HR] 0.44; 95% CI, 0.34-0.57; P<.001). In a multivariable analysis, BE with IM was associated with longer survival independent of patient age or sex, tumor stage or location, and BE length (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.5-0.88; P=.005). In the United Kingdom cohort, patients BE and IM had a reduced risk of death compared with those without (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.5-0.69; P<.001), with continued significance in multivariable analysis that included patient age and sex and tumor stage and tumor location (adjusted HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.93; P=.006).

conclusionTwo types of EAC can be characterized based on the presence or absence of BE. These findings could increase our understanding the etiology of EAC, and be used in management and prognosis of patients.

Indexed as

PhenotypeAdenocarcinomaAgedBarrett EsophagusEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagusHumansIntestinesMaleMetaplasiaMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsRegression AnalysisUnited KingdomBarrett EsophagusEsophageal AdenocarcinomaEsophagusSurvival

Identifiers

PMID30165050
PMCPMC6298575
OpenAlexW2889006231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.