Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30661172›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2019

Nodal FDG-PET/CT uptake influences outcome and relapse location among esophageal cancer patients submitted to chemotherapy or radiochemotherapy.

E Jimenez-Jimenez, P Mateos, I Ortiz, N Aymar, R Roncero, M Gimenez, J Pardo, S Sabater

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Prognostic value of baselineRadiation oncology (London, England) · 2023
    Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

E Jimenez-JimenezRadiation Oncology Department, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Calle Hermanos Falcó, 30, 02008, Albacete, Spain. estherjj@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1170-1702
P MateosMedical Physics Department, Clinica IMQ Zorrotzaurre, Bilbao, Spain.
I OrtizRadiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
N AymarRadiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
R RonceroRadiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
M GimenezNuclear Medicine Department, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
J PardoRadiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
S SabaterRadiation Oncology Department, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Calle Hermanos Falcó, 30, 02008, Albacete, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOur aim was investigate whether lymph node uptake is associated with survival and regional relapses, and relapse patterns with respect to the radiotherapy fields in esophageal cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND

methodsThe FDG-PET/CT image datasets of 56 patients were analyzed. All patients underwent definitive or neoadjuvant radio/chemotherapy (RCT). All patients suffering from persistent or recurrent local/regional-only disease after RCT were considered for salvage resection. Patients with adenocarcinoma without metastatic disease were considered for planned resection (usually within 3 months of treatment).

resultsPatients with PET-positive lymph nodes before treatment had a worse overall survival and a shorter disease-free survival than those without PET-positive nodes. They also had worse node and metastatic relapse-free survival. N2 patients had statistically significant poorer outcomes than N1-N0 patients and a better survival if the involved nodes were closer to the esophageal tumor. Involved node location by PET/CT also affected global, nodal and metastatic relapses. In addition, an increment of SUVmax value increased relative risk of death and increased relative risk of node and metastatic relapses. The first site of relapse was metastatic recurrence and, second, local recurrence. The most frequent were "in-field" loco/regional recurrence. We observed a relationship between patients classified-N1 and out-field nodal recurrence (p = 0.024), and between patients-N2 and in-field nodal recurrence. The number of PET-positive nodes was an independent significant prognostic predictor for relapse (p < 0.001).

conclusionOur study shows that only FDG-PET/CT can provide prognostic information in EC. Nodal PET/CT uptake influences outcome and relapse location among EC patients.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Squamous CellChemoradiotherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPrognosisRadiopharmaceuticalsRadiopharmaceuticalsEsophagealFDG-PET/CTNodalRadiotherapyRelapse

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.