SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2020
Exploration of a new intrapapillary capillary loop classification in diagnosis of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma staging: a meta-analysis and single-center study.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Imaging in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Literature Review of the Current State of the Art.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosing microvessels of precancerous lesions and superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinomas: a multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThough intrapapillary capillary loops (IPCL) can be used to diagnose the staging of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC), the accuracy still remains controversial. Moreover, which IPCL classification is more suitable for clinical application is unclear. The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of different IPCL classifications and to explore a new classification. PATIENTS AND
methodsA meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the three IPCL classifications for SESCC staging. STATA 12.0 software was used and bivariate mixed effects-model was applied for the meta-analysis. A new classification was developed based on the meta-analysis result. Then a single-center study was conducted for further validation analysis.
resultsOf the 2310 citations, 14 studies fulfilled our criteria. For epithelium (EP) and lamina propria mucosa (LPM) staging tumors, IPCL showed high diagnostic accuracy (Inoue: 87.17%, Arima: 98.71%, JES: 86.70%). For muscularis mucosa (MM) and submucosa (SM1), 23.12% were underestimated and the Japan Esophageal Society classification (JES) was better than Inoue (Accuracy: 75.48% VS 58.67%, P < 0.05). For ≥ SM2, 38.86% were underdiagnosed and the diagnostic accuracy of Arima classification was significantly higher than the other two (P < 0.05). Our study showed that the new criteria had higher diagnostic sensitivity than the widely used classification (JES) for differentiating ≥ SM2 staging cancer from EP-SM1 (0.77 VS 0.50, P < 0.05).
conclusionsIPCL was valuable for diagnosing SESCC staging. However, ≥ MM would be underestimated easily. Our study revealed that the diagnostic sensitivity for ≥ SM2 staging tumors was significantly improved by the new standard.
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.