ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2019
Rate of missed oesophageal cancer at routine endoscopy and survival outcomes: A multicentric cohort study.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Esophageal Precancerous Lesions and Esophageal Cancer.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026Review
- Article
- AI in esophageal cancer: advances, barriers to clinical translation, and perspectives for digital health.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Hyperspectral reconstruction of white light endoscopy images for enhanced segmentation of early esophageal lesions in patients.iScience · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of a national root cause analysis system for post-endoscopy upper gastrointestinal cancer.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Current Advances, Clinical Integration, and Future Directions: A Narrative Review.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-assisted endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- Characteristics and causes of post-endoscopy Barrett's neoplasia: Retrospective multicenter study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Upper Gastrointestinal Diagnosis.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Differences in Clinical Characteristics Between Missed and Detected Laryngopharyngeal Cancers.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in endoscopic diagnosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and precancerous lesions.Chinese medical journal · 2025Review
- Effect of computer aided detection system on esophageal neoplasm diagnosis in varied levels of endoscopists.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Esophageal cancers missed at upper endoscopy in Central Norway 2004 to 2021 - A population-based study.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Computer-aided endoscopic diagnostic system modified with hyperspectral imaging for the classification of esophageal neoplasms.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Revolutionizing healthcare by use of artificial intelligence in esophageal carcinoma - a narrative review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Review
- Optimal timing of simethicone administration prior to upper endoscopy: A multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled trial.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in esophageal cancer diagnosis and treatment: where are we now?-a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Review
- Analysis of white-light imaging-based features predictive for determination of lesion depths of superficial flat esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective multicenter study from China.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Computer-aided characterization of early cancer in Barrett's esophagus on i-scan magnification imaging: a multicenter international study.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Missed oesophageal cancer (MEC) at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) is poorly documented. Objective: The objectives of this study were: (1) to assess the rate, predictors and survival of MEC; (2) to compare MEC and non-MEC tumours. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at four tertiary centres. Oesophageal cancers (ECs) diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 were included. Patients with a premalignant condition (Barrett, achalasia), prior diagnosis of EC or oesophagogastric junction tumour of gastric origin were excluded. MEC was defined as EC detected within 36 months after negative UGE. Results: 123,395 UGEs were performed during the study period, with 502 ECs being diagnosed (0.4%). A total of 391 ECs were finally included. Overall MEC rate was 6.4% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 4.4-9.3%). The interval between negative and diagnostic UGE was less than 2 years in 84% of the cases. Multivariate analysis showed that a negative endoscopy was associated with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and less experienced endoscopists. MEC was smaller than non-MEC at diagnosis (25 versus 40 mm, Conclusions: MEC accounted for 6.4% of all ECs and was associated with poor survival. High-quality UGE and awareness of MEC may help to reduce its incidence.
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.