Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36042124›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2022

Management of Clinical T2N0 Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: What Is the Optimal Treatment?

Rolfy A Perez Holguin, Elizabeth J Olecki, Kelly A Stahl, William G Wong, Charles C Vining, Matthew E B Dixon, June S Peng

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rolfy A Perez HolguinDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
Elizabeth J OleckiDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
Kelly A StahlDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
William G WongDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
Charles C ViningDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
Matthew E B DixonDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
June S PengDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA. jpeng1@pennstatehealth.psu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1891-4199
Pennsylvania State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma includes neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery. The optimal treatment for clinical T2N0M0 (cT2N0) disease is debated. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment in these patients.

methodsThe National Cancer Database was used to identify patients who underwent surgery for cT2N0 esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinoma from 2004 to 2017. Patients were grouped into surgery-alone, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), and adjuvant therapy (AT) groups. Subgroups of high-risk patients (tumor ≥ 3 cm, poor differentiation, or lymphovascular invasion) and patients upstaged after upfront surgery were identified. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to compare overall survival.

resultsOf 2160 patients included, 957 (44.3%) underwent surgery-alone, 821 (38.0%) underwent NAT and surgery, and 382 (17.7%) underwent surgery and AT. One thousand six hundred nineteen (75.0%) patients had high-risk features. Six hundred fourteen (45.9%) patients were upstaged after upfront surgery. In the overall cohort, AT was associated with improved survival compared to NAT (HR 0.618, p < 0.001) and surgery-alone (HR 0.699, p < 0.001). There was no difference in survival between NAT and surgery-alone (HR 1.132, p = 0.112). Similar results were observed in high-risk patients. Patients upstaged after upfront surgery who received AT had improved survival compared to those initially treated with NAT (HR 0.613, p < 0.001).

conclusionThis analysis suggests that cT2N0 esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinomas may not benefit from the intensive multimodality therapy utilized in locally advanced disease. Selective use of AT for patients who are upstaged pathologically, or have high-risk features, is associated with improved outcomes.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaEsophagectomyEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagogastric JunctionHumansNeoplasm StagingAdjuvant therapyEsophageal adenocarcinomaNeoadjuvant therapyPathologic upstaging

Identifiers

PMID36042124
OpenAlexW4293858359

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.