ArticleJournal of geriatric oncology2020
Treatment-related toxicity and outcomes in older versus younger patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.
Article in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic analysis and treatment utilization of different treatment strategies in elderly esophageal cancer patients with distant metastases: a SEER database analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Trial
- Induction chemoimmunotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a real-world study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Outcomes in older adults with metastatic esophageal and gastric carcinoma treated with palliative chemotherapy.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Review
- The Role of Radiation Therapy in the Older Patient.Current oncology reports · 2021Review
- Predicting Prognosis and Adverse Events by Hematologic Markers in Patients with Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) followed by esophagectomy is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Older patients are often felt to be poor candidates for nCRT. Limited data is available to guide the use of nCRT in this population.
methodsA retrospective review of patients treated at a tertiary cancer center between 2002 and 2014 was conducted grouping patients by age (≥ 65 or < 65) for evaluation of differences in toxicity and outcomes. Evaluation of pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was also performed. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) determined associations between age, toxicities and outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method (KM) assessed overall survival (OS) and relapse free survival (RFS).
results125 patients were identified for this study (67 aging <65, and 58 ≥ 65). In the UVA, advanced age was only associated with increased hematologic toxicity (p = .04). After adjusting for covariates in the MVA, there were no significant differences in toxicity between older and younger patients. There were also no differences between overall survival and relapse free survival between age groups. Increased pre-treatment NLR was strongly correlated with advanced age (p = .01), increased hospitalizations (p = .04), and decreased RFS (p = .002).
conclusionsOlder patients who underwent nCRT followed by esophagectomy had similar toxicities and outcomes as younger patients suggesting that nCRT before esophagectomy is safe in select older adults with esophageal cancer. PLR and NLR may serve as prognostic markers of aging, toxicity, and outcomes. Further research is warranted to optimize the therapy of older patients with this disease.
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.