ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2020
Novel Endoscopic Criteria for Predicting Tumor Invasion Depth in Superficial Esophageal Squamous Carcinoma.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2020. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Long-term Survival Risk Prediction Model for Patients with Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate prediction of tumor invasion depth in superficial esophageal squamous carcinoma (SESC) is essential for deciding the appropriate treatment strategy. We proposed novel endoscopic criteria to differentiate between mucosal and submucosal esophageal cancers and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and usefulness of the criteria.
methodsA total of 352 patients who underwent endoscopic or surgical resection for SESC between 1991 and 2010 were included. First, the novel endoscopic criteria were created based on the endoscopic features of 60 randomly selected patients as follows: for T1m cancers, I. flat or slightly elevated or depressed lesion with smooth/even surface of any size, II. slightly elevated lesion of ≤ 1 cm with granular or uneven surface, III. hyperemic flat lesion of ≤ 3 cm with granular or uneven surface, IV. slightly depressed lesion of ≤ 2 cm with uneven surface and for T1sm cancers, I. irregularly (unevenly) nodular or protruded lesion of any size, II. slightly elevated lesion of > 1 cm with granular or uneven surface, III. hyperemic flat lesion of > 3 cm with granular or uneven surface, IV. irregularly (unevenly) depressed lesion of > 2 cm, and V. ulcerative lesion of any size. Next, the endoscopic findings of the remaining 292 patients were reviewed according to the criteria.
resultsThe accuracy of novel endoscopic criteria was 79.5% (232/292). The sensitivity and specificity of mucosal cancers were 78.4% and 81.0%, respectively, whereas those for submucosal cancers were 81.0% and 78.4%, respectively. The accuracy for mucosal cancers was high (97.3%, 72/74) when the lesions were flat or slightly elevated/depressed with smooth/even surface regardless of size, whereas that for submucosal cancers was high (85.7%, 18/21) when the lesions were irregular/nodular protrusions regardless of size. In multivariate analysis, macroscopic type IIb lesion was identified as an independent factor affecting accuracy (
conclusionThe novel endoscopic criteria appear to be accurate and useful in predicting invasion depth in SESC. Our criteria might help not only to decide the treatment strategy between surgery and endoscopic resection but also to predict the outcomes of SESC.
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.