ArticleFrontiers in oncology2020
A Comparison of the Current N2 Classification and a Modified N2 Categorization in TNM Staging of Esophageal Cancer Patients.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of the current N classification and a modified N2 categorization in TNM staging of esophageal cancer (EC) patients. METHODOLOGY: A total of 2753 EC patients were enrolled in the study: 2283 EC patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and 470 separate Chinese patients were used to verify the results of the SEER database. X-tile software was employed to determine the optimal cutoff points of the number of metastatic lymph nodes (LNs) in the N2 category. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify the survival risk factors.
resultPatients in the N2 category were divided into two groups based on the number of metastatic LNs. Patients with three and four metastatic LNs were categorized as N2a, while those with five and six metastatic LNs were categorized as N2b. The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate in the SEER database was 71.5%, 42.3%, 23.6%, 17.2%, and 10.7% for patients with N0, N1, N2a, N2b, and N3, respectively (
conclusionThe current N2 category should be further divided into two groups (N2a and N2b) to provide more accurate prognosis information that could further help in developing personalized therapeutic strategies.
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.