ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2019
Comparison of long-term outcomes between radical esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with clinical T1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Esophageal cancer practice guidelines 2022 edited by the Japan esophageal society: part 1.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-term outcomes of patients with clinical T1bN0M0 thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated using radical esophagectomy were compared with those treated using definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT).
methodsA total of 320 consecutive patients with clinical T1bN0M0 thoracic ESCC who initially underwent radical esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy during 2001-2011 were deemed eligible. Of these patients, 102 and 218 underwent radical esophagectomy and dCRT, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and causes of death were compared between the esophagectomy group and the chemoradiotherapy group.
resultsFive-year OS in the esophagectomy group was significantly better than that of the chemoradiotherapy group in both the overall sample and a subset of patients aged ≥70 years (P=0.004 and P=0.040). Male patients appeared to benefit more from radical esophagectomy (P=0.005). Until 2006, radical esophagectomy yielded superior results relative to dCRT (P=0.009). However, the survival outcomes after chemoradiotherapy were non-inferior to those after esophagectomy since 2007 (P=0.255). Up to 2006, esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy groups exhibited significant differences in the causes of death (P=0.024), such that the latter group had a significantly higher rate of deaths due to respiratory complications (P=0.025). However, the introduction of 3-dimensional radiation with CT guided planning in 2007 resolved this inter-group difference (P=0.460).
conclusionsThe appreciable developments in radiation technology have enabled the achievement of comparable long-term outcomes in the chemoradiotherapy group compared with the esophagectomy group in patients with clinical T1bN0M0 thoracic ESCC.
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.