ArticleBMC surgery2021
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy improves survival in locally advanced adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a propensity score matching analysis.
Article in BMC surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal treatments for resectable esophagogastric junction cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Preferred neoadjuvant therapy for gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2022Pooled it
- Altered genome‑wide hydroxymethylation analysis for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in esophageal cancer.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- Recent advances in multidisciplinary therapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Article
- Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation.Cancers · 2022Review
- Application of machine learning approaches to predict the 5-year survival status of patients with esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Article
- Treatment Options for T1 Stage Adenocarcinoma of Esophagogastric Junction: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
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
backgroundTo analyze whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) could improve the survival for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT). Both neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and chemoradiotherapy before surgery have been shown to improve overall long-term survival for patients with adenocarcinoma in the esophagus or esophagogastric junction compared to surgery alone. It remains controversial whether nCRT is superior to nCT.
methods170 Patients with locally advanced (cT3-4NxM0) Siewert II and III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin with or without concurrent radiotherapy in the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was used and delivered in 5 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy per week for 5 weeks (total dose of PTV: 45 Gy). 120 Patients were included in the propensity score matching (PSM) analysis to compare the effects of nCRT with nCT on survival.
resultsWith a median follow-up of 41.2 months for patients alive after propensity score matching analysis, the 1- and 3-year OS were 84.8%, 55.0% in nCRT group and 78.3%, 38.3% in nCT group (P = 0.040; HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.02-2.69). The 1- and 3-year PFS were 84.9%, 49.2% in nCRT group and 68.3%, 29.0% in nCT group (P = 0.010; HR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.14-2.85). The pathological complete response (pCR) was 17.0% in nCRT group and 1.9% in nCT group (P = 0.030). No significant difference was observed in postoperative complications between the two groups.
conclusionThe nCRT confers a better survival with improved R0 resection rate and pCR rate compared with nCT for the patients with locally advanced AEG.
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.