Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30561117›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2019

Value of radiotherapy in addition to esophagectomy for stage II and III thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Analysis of surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database.

Jing Yu, Wen Ouyang, Yi Li, Jing Hu, Yu Xu, Yongchang Wei, Zhengkai Liao, Yu Liu, Junhong Zhang, Conghua Xie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. FBXL18 increases cell proliferation and reduces cell radiosensitivity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors.

Jing YuDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2836-6373
Wen OuyangDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yi LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Jing HuDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yu XuDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yongchang WeiDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Zhengkai LiaoDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yu LiuDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Junhong ZhangDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Conghua XieDepartment of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6623-9864

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Elisa de Stanchina · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To determine the value of radiotherapy in addition to esophagectomy for stage II and III TESCC. We searched the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for all cases of stage II-III TESCC. Patients were grouped as those receiving pre- or postoperative radiotherapy plus esophagectomy and those receiving esophagectomy alone. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between the groups. Among the 3292 patients, multimodality treatments (pre- or postoperative radiotherapy plus surgery) were more effective than surgery alone (5-year, OS: 17.3% vs 7.9%; P < 0.001; CSS: 51.8% vs 34.9%; P < 0.001). Among the patients receiving multimodality treatments, multivariate analyses revealed stage to be the most significant prognostic factor for OS (II vs III, HR, 0.726; P < 0.001), but the sequence of radiotherapy and surgery was only of the marginal significance (pre- vs postoperative, HR, 0.875; P = 0.093). Preoperative radiotherapy provided significantly better survival than postoperative radiotherapy in stage III disease (5-year, OS: 13.0% vs 11.0%, P < 0.04; CSS: 49.2% vs 31.7%, P < 0.003), but not in stage II disease (5-year OS: 23.5% vs 21.0%, P = 0.519; CSS: 62.0% vs 53.4%, P = 0.075). Radiotherapy in addition to esophagectomy provides better outcomes than esophagectomy alone for in stage II-III TESCC. Preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery appears to be the optimal treatment strategy in stage III TESCC.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRadiotherapy, AdjuvantSEER ProgramSurvival AnalysisThoracic NeoplasmsMultimodality treatmentspostoperative radiotherapypreoperative radiotherapysquamous cell carcinomathoracic esophageal carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID30561117
PMCPMC6346254

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.