Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34013382›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2022

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study from the National Cancer Center in China.

Guochao Zhang, Chaoqi Zhang, Nan Sun, Liyan Xue, Zhaoyang Yang, Lingling Fang, Zhihui Zhang, Yuejun Luo, Shugeng Gao, Qi Xue and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Guochao ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Chaoqi ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Nan SunDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Liyan XueDepartment of Pathology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Zhaoyang YangDepartment of Pathology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Lingling FangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Zhihui ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Yuejun LuoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Shugeng GaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Qi XueDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Juwei MuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Yushun GaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Fengwei TanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Jie HeDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. prof.jiehe@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0285-5403
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

the National Key Research and Development Program of China 2016YFC1303200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe optimal mode of neoadjuvant treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been well characterized. Our study compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) for patients with ESCC.

methodsData from ESCC patients receiving NCRT or NCT combined with esophagectomy between 2010 and 2018 from the National Cancer Center in China were retrospectively collected. Long-term survival, pathological response, and perioperative mortality and morbidity were compared between the NCRT and NCT groups. A Cox proportional hazards model and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to minimize bias due to potential confounding.

resultsOut of 327 eligible patients with ESCC in our study, 90 patients were identified in each group by PSM. The complete pathologic response (pCR) rate in the NCRT group was markedly higher than that in the NCT group (before PSM: 35.1% vs. 6.0%; after PSM: 38.9% vs. 5.6%; both P < 0.001). The rates of 30-day or 90-day mortality were comparable between the two groups, but the NCRT group had a longer postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.012 after PSM) and more postoperative complications (P < 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.014 after PSM), especially, anastomotic leaks (P = 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.013 after PSM). No significant differences in 5-year overall survival (OS) (P = 0.439) or 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) (P = 0.611) were noted between unmatched groups, but the trend favored NCRT in the propensity score-matched group (77.3% vs. 61.3%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-2.87; P = 0.141 for OS, and 77.8% vs. 60.5%; HR 1.72; 95% CI 0.95-3.11; P = 0.073 for RFS). Multivariate analysis showed that only ypT and ypN stages were independent predictors of OS before and after PSM (both P < 0.05).

conclusionThere was no difference in survival between the NCT and NCRT groups, although a trend favored NCRT related to the significantly higher pCR rates. Prospective head-to-head clinical trials to compare these two types of neoadjuvant therapies in ESCC are warranted.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaChemoradiotherapyChemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantEsophagectomyHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesEsophageal squamous cell carcinomaNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapyNeoadjuvant chemotherapyPathologyPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID34013382
PMCPMC11801005
OpenAlexW3163680020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.