ArticleCancer medicine2020
Chemoradiotherapy vs radiotherapy for nonoperative early stage esophageal cancer: A seer data analysis.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgery versus chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Effect of exercise, nutritional, and psychological interventions on postoperative nutritional and mental status of patients with esophageal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- A novel prognostic nomogram to predict survival of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after definitive chemoradiotherapy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Nomograms for prognosis prediction in esophageal adenocarcinoma: realities and challenges.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Review
- Comparison of radiation esophagitis associated with daytime versus evening radiotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 promotes radioresistance by regulating glutamate-cysteine ligase modifier subunit and its unique immunoinvasive pattern.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram to predict cardiac death after radiotherapy for esophageal cancer.Cancer innovation · 2023Article
- Real-world experience with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 immunotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer: A retrospective single-center study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Chemoradiotherapy vs radiotherapy for nonoperative early stage esophageal cancer: A seer data analysis.Cancer medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe benefit of endoscopic treatment (ET) and esophagectomy for early esophageal cancer (EC) has been sufficiently recognized. Radiotherapy (RT) is the main treatment modality for patients who do not undergo surgery. The effectiveness of adding chemotherapy (CT) to RT remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and RT alone on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in early EC patients not undergoing surgery.
methodsData collected between 2004 and 2015 were obtained from the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. All the samples were randomly grouped into the training cohort or the verification cohort. The training cohort was split into subgroups by stage, age, and histology. Stage was based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 6th edition published in 2004. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to compare OS and CSS. The performance of the nomogram was measured by a concordance index (C-index) and the calibration curve.
resultsData for a total of 5332 patients were obtained from the SEER database. A total of 3736 patients (stage I: n = 1277; stage IIA: n = 1484; stage IIB: n = 975) were used for the training cohort. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age, sex, histology, grade, therapy, reasons for no surgery, and year of diagnosis were independent predictors of OS. The survival curve of patients treated with CRT showed a significant survival benefit compared to that in patients treated by RT alone in stage I, stage IIA, and stage IIB. CRT was also found to be related to better survival than RT in patients at a younger age (<65) and an older age (≥65) with squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma.
conclusionsCompared with RT, CRT results in better OS and CSS in early EC patients who do not undergo surgery.
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.