Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35530284›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2022

Endoscopic features of esophageal high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia dominated by cytological atypia.

Liang Wang, Nan Dai, Dingrong Chen, Airui Jiang, Guobin Liao, Chaoqiang Fan, Xin Yang, Xue Peng, Xubiao Nie, Hui Lin and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Liang WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Nan DaiCancer Center, Dapin Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400042, China.
Dingrong ChenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Airui JiangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Guobin LiaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Chaoqiang FanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Xin YangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Xue PengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Xubiao NieDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Hui LinDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
En LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Xi LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Xinwei DiaoDepartment of Pathology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.
Jianying BaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University Chongqing 400037, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Little is known about esophageal high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia dominated by cytological atypia (HGINc). We aimed to elucidate the endoscopic features of HGINc compared with esophageal high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia dominated by architectural atypia (HGINa). All patients pathologically diagnosed as esophageal high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia after endoscopic submucosal dissection at our center between January 2018 and December 2019 were included in this study. According to the pathological diagnosis, the patients were divided into two groups: HGINa group and HGINc group. Basic characteristics and endoscopic information were collected in detail. Data were analyzed statistically. Binary logistic regression was performed and a predictive model for HGINc was established. Then we evaluated its predictive value and built a nomogram for clinical application. A total of 175 patients were included in this study (126 with HGINa and 49 with HGINc). Among 228 lesions found in all patients, there were 148 HGINa and 80 HGINc. The independent relevant factors for HGINc were tobacco and alcohol usage, color, and gross type. To predict risk of HGINc, a three-factor model (TFM) was established with a highest area under curve (AUC) as 0.869 (95% CI, 0.852, 0.939). When the cut-off value was set as 0.3569184, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for HGINc was 81.14%, 88.75%, 77.03%, 67.62%, and 92.68%, respectively. HGINc differs greatly in endoscopic features from HGINa in our study. It's important to reduce misdiagnosis that our model was established with good predictive value for clinical application.

Indexed as

Architectural atypiacytological atypiaendoscopic diagnosisesophageal squamous cell carcinomahigh-grade intraepithelial neoplasia

Identifiers

PMID35530284
PMCPMC9077055

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.