Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32448253›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2020

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for node-positive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Qifeng Wang, Jinyi Lang, Tao Li, Lin Peng, Wei Dai, Yinchun Jiang, Tianpeng Xie, Qiang Fang, Yi Wang, Lei Wu and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qifeng WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Jinyi LangDepartment of Radiation Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Tao LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Lin PengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China. penglinms@126.com.
Wei DaiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Yinchun JiangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Tianpeng XieDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Qiang FangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Yi WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Lei WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Bangrong CaoDepartment of Medical Oncology,Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Yongtao HanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institution, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610041, China. hanyongt2019@163.com.
Sichuan Cancer Hospital · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

Sichuan Province Science and Technology Support Program 2018JY0277Sichuan Province Science and Technology Support Program 2019YFS0378Sichuan Province Science and Technology Support Program 2019YJ0581
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeAfter esophagectomy, adjuvant chemotherapy (S + CT) and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (S + CRT) can improve survival in patients with node-positive resectable esophageal cancer. However, we are not aware of any studies that directly compared these adjuvant treatments. This study aimed to compare S + CT and S + CRT for patients with esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively identified patients with node-positive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent S + CT or S + CRT at Sichuan Cancer Hospital during 2008-2017. The patients' characteristics were compared, as well as their overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) outcomes. Propensity score matching was used to create balanced patient groups according to adjuvant treatment, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify factors that predicted the survival outcomes.

resultsThe 859 eligible patients underwent S + CRT (250 patients, 29.1%) or S + CT (609 patients, 70.9%). After propensity score matching (247 patients per group), the 5-year OS rates were 41.8% for S + CRT and 26.8% for S + CT (p = 0.028), and the 5-year DFS rates were 37.2% for S + CRT and 25.5% for S + CT (p = 0.012). Multivariate Cox regression analysis of the matched samples revealed that, relative to the S + CT group, the S + CRT group had better OS (hazard ratio: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.91; p = 0.006) and DFS (hazard ratio: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56-0.88; p = 0.002).

conclusionAmong patients with node-positive resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, S + CRT was associated with better OS than S + CT. A multicenter randomized clinical trial is warranted to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

Chemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantChemotherapy, AdjuvantDisease-Free SurvivalEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaEsophagectomyHumansPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAdjuvant therapyChemoradiotherapyChemotherapyEsophageal cancerEsophagectomy

Identifiers

PMID32448253
PMCPMC7245784
OpenAlexW3037056594

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.