ArticleCancer management and research2020
Association Between Multiple Lines of Active Therapy and Prognosis in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEsophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a critical threat to health and life. More than half of ESCC patients have recurrent or metastatic disease. Most late-stage patients undergo first-line treatment but experience further progression. Many of these patients have good performance status and are able to receive second-line therapy and even further treatments rather than best supportive care. Our analysis aimed to explore whether multiple lines of active treatment are beneficial in ESCC patients.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were used to identify whether the number of active treatment lines was related to prognosis. All analyses and the corresponding survival curves were based on the Cox proportional hazard regression model and the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparisons between groups were conducted using the
resultsOf a total of 138 patients with recurrent or metastatic disease, 66 (61.1%) received one line of active treatment, and 42 (38.9%) patients received two and more lines. Multiple lines of active therapy were statistically significantly associated with better prognosis (crude hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI))=0.21 (0.06-0.73)), even after adjusting for relevant confounders (adjusted HR (95% CI)=0.19 (0.04-0.86)). More grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity patients were observed in the multiple-line treatment group (p=0.033). A small number of patients were cured by palliative management; these patients were more likely to have received both systematic and local treatment than other patients with repeated progression (9/15 versus 40/117, p=0.051).
conclusionMultiple lines of active treatment are related to prolonged survival in recurrent and metastatic ESCC patients, and adverse effects are acceptable. Comprehensive therapy modalities are recommended.
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.