Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31535225›Full record

ReviewSurgery today2020

Recent progress in multidisciplinary treatment for patients with esophageal cancer.

Masayuki Watanabe, Reiko Otake, Ryotaro Kozuki, Tasuku Toihata, Keita Takahashi, Akihiko Okamura, Yu Imamura

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Surgery today, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 282 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
282citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
36.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

282 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 434 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

222 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Masayuki WatanabeDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. masayuki.watanabe@jfcr.or.jp.
Reiko OtakeDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Ryotaro KozukiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Tasuku ToihataDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Keita TakahashiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Akihiko OkamuraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Yu ImamuraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
The Cancer Institute Hospital · JPJapanese Foundation For Cancer Research · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Esophageal cancer is one of the most aggressive gastrointestinal cancers. This review focuses on eight topics within the multidisciplinary approach for esophageal cancer. As esophagectomy is highly invasive and likely to impair quality of life, the development of less invasive strategies is expected. Endoscopic resection (ER) of early esophageal cancer is a less invasive treatment for early esophageal cancer. A recent phase II trial revealed that combined ER and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is efficacious as an esophagus-preserving treatment for cT1bN0 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Esophagectomy and definitive CRT are equally effective for patients with clinical stage I SCC in terms of long-term outcome. For locally advanced resectable cancers, multidisciplinary treatment strategies have been established through several clinical trials of neoadjuvant or perioperative treatment. Minimally invasive esophagectomy may improve the outcomes of patients and CRT is a curative-intent alternative to esophagectomy. CRT with 50.4 Gy radiotherapy combined with salvage surgery is a promising option to preserve the esophagus. Induction chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy may improve the outcomes of patients with locally advanced unresectable tumors. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are effective for esophageal cancer, and their introduction to clinical practice is awaited.

Indexed as

ChemoradiotherapyCombined Modality TherapyEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyEsophagoscopyEsophagusHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingSalvage TherapyChemoradiotherapyEsophageal cancerEsophagectomyMultidisciplinary treatment

Identifiers

PMID31535225
PMCPMC6952324
OpenAlexW2974056291

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.