Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35494060›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2022

Esophageal Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma: A Review of 58 Cases.

Xin Wang, Yu-Ping Chen, Shao-Bin Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xin WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China.
Yu-Ping ChenDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China.
Shao-Bin ChenDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China.
Shantou University · CNCancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Esophageal mucoepidermoid carcinoma (EMEC) is a rare disease. The biological behavior and treatment of this malignancy are not well established. Methods: Data from 58 patients with EMEC who underwent esophagectomy were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 5028 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association between clinicopathological factors and survival. Results: The study cohort included 36 males and 22 females with a median age of 59 years (range, 40-78 years). Of the 47 patients who underwent preoperative esophagoscopic biopsy, only 1 patient was diagnosed with EMEC. EMEC was more often found in female patients (39.7% versus 25.8%, P=0.036) and patients with EMEC had a significantly lower rate of lymph node metastasis (25.0% versus 49.4%, P<0.001) than patients with ESCC. After 1:1 propensity score matching, the 5-year overall survival rate of 55.2% for patients with EMEC was similar to that of 61.9% for patients with ESCC (P=0.399). Conclusions: EMEC is a rare disease that more often affects females and these patients has less lymph node metastasis than patients with ESCC. Preoperative esophagoscopic biopsy has difficulty obtaining an accurate pathological diagnosis for EMEC patients. The prognosis for EMEC is similar to that for ESCC.

Indexed as

esophagusmucoepidermoid carcinomaprognosissurgerytreatment

Identifiers

PMID35494060
PMCPMC9043553
OpenAlexW4224027046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.