Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35116602›Full record

ArticleTranslational cancer research2021

Age plays an important role in the decision of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): a propensity-score matched analysis of multicenter data (3JECROG R-02A).

Lan Wang, Xin Wang, Xuejiao Ren, Chun Han, Zefen Xiao, Shuchai Zhu, Xueying Qiao, Zhiguo Zhou, Wenbin Shen, Junqiang Chen and 11 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

21 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Lan WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Xin WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xuejiao RenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Chun HanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Zefen XiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Shuchai ZhuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Xueying QiaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Zhiguo ZhouDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Wenbin ShenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Junqiang ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Teaching Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Provincial Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Qingsong PangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China.
Wencheng ZhangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China.
Yidian ZhaoDepartment 4th of Radiation Oncology, Anyang Cancer Hospital, Anyang, China.
Xiaomin WangDepartment 4th of Radiation Oncology, Anyang Cancer Hospital, Anyang, China.
Xinchen SunDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Xiaolin GeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Kaixian ZhangDepartment of Oncology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou, China.
Miaomiao HuDepartment of Oncology, Tengzhou Central People's Hospital, Tengzhou, China.
Gaofeng LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Beijing Hospital, Beijing, China.
Miaoling LiuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Yadi WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, the PLA Army General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University · CNHebei Medical University · CNAnyang Tumor Hospital · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNTengzhou Central People's Hospital · CNTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CNAffiliated Hospital of Hebei University · CNBeijing Hospital · CNFujian Provincial Cancer Hospital · CNJiangsu Province Hospital · CNNanjing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo examine the survival benefit of definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) compared to radiotherapy alone in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) using a real-world patient population.

methodsThis retrospective study included 2,762 patients with ESCC across ten medical centers in China from 2001 to 2017. A total of 1,133 patients received radiotherapy alone and 815 patients were treated with CCRT. The patient survival rates were assessed by propensity-score matching (PSM) and subgroup analysis.

resultsThe baseline characteristics were significantly different between the two groups, with the CCRT group showing a higher proportion of males, younger patients, cervical/upper thoracic cancers, and worse T and N stages. There were no significant differences in the clinical characteristics between the two groups after PSM. Before PSM, the median overall survival (OS) rates were 31.2 and 24.1 months in the CCRT and RT alone groups, respectively, demonstrating the superior therapeutic effects (TEs) of the CCRT. However, the median OS rates were not significantly different between the two groups after PSM (32.6 and 39.4 months in the CCRT and radiotherapy alone groups, respectively). The subgroup analyses revealed that the median OS was significantly better in the CCRT group compared to the radiotherapy alone group (37.5

conclusionsCCRT may not be suitable for all patients with localized ESCC. Younger patients less than 70 years of age might benefit significantly from CCRT. However, in patients aged 70 years and older, the potential survival benefit of CCRT and the optimal combination treatment regimens require further investigation.

Indexed as

chemoradiotherapyEsophageal neoplasmesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC)prognosisradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID35116602
PMCPMC8797428
OpenAlexW3171236474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.