Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30600672›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2019

Management of Clinical T1N0M0 Esophageal Cancer.

Andrew J Yang, Seo Hee Choi, Hwa Kyung Byun, Hyun Ju Kim, Jinhyun Choi, Yong Chan Lee, Sang Kil Lee, Kyung Ran Park, Chang Geol Lee

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Management of early oesophageal cancer: An overview.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew J YangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Seo Hee ChoiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Hwa Kyung ByunDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Hyun Ju KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Jinhyun ChoiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Yong Chan LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Sang Kil LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Kyung Ran ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Chang Geol LeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Seoul, Korea.
Yonsei University · KRKosin University Gospel Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Endoscopic resection is a standard treatment for stage T1a esophageal cancer, with esophagectomy or radical radiation therapy (RT) performed for stage T1b lesions. This study aimed to compare treatment outcomes of each modality for clinical stage T1 esophageal cancer. Methods: In total, 179 patients with clinical T1N0M0-stage esophageal cancer treated from 2006 to 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Sixty-two patients with clinical T1a-stage cancer underwent endoscopic resection. Among 117 patients with clinical T1b-stage cancer, 82 underwent esophagectomy, and 35 received chemoradiotherapy or RT. We compared overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates for each treatment modality. Results: The median follow-up time was 32 months (range, 1 to 120 months). The 5-year OS and RFS rates for patients with stage T1a cancer receiving endoscopic resection were 100% and 85%, respectively. For patients with stage T1b, the 5-year OS and RFS rates were 78% and 77%, respectively, for the esophagectomy group; 80% and 44%, respectively, for the RT alone group; and 96% and 80%, respectively, for the chemoradiation group. The esophagectomy group showed significantly higher RFS than the RT alone group (p=0.04). There was no significant difference in RFS between the esophagectomy and chemoradiation groups (p=0.922). Grade 4 or higher treatment-related complications occurred in four patients who underwent esophagectomy. Conclusions: Endoscopic resection appeared to be an adequate treatment for patients with T1a-stage esophageal cancer. The multidisciplinary approach involving chemoradiation was comparable to esophagectomy in terms of survival outcome without serious complications for T1b-stage esophageal cancer.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overChemoradiotherapyCombined Modality TherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeChemoradiotherapyEndoscopic mucosal resectionEsophageal neoplasmEsophagectomyRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID30600672
PMCPMC6529170
OpenAlexW2945733336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.