ArticleEClinicalMedicine2022
Use of a non-endoscopic immunocytological device (Cytosponge™) for post chemoradiotherapy surveillance in patients with oesophageal cancer in the UK (CYTOFLOC): A multicentre feasibility study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03529669 (Evaluation of a Non-Endoscopic Immunocytological Device), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Evaluation of a Non-Endoscopic Immunocytological Device (Cytosponge™) for Post Chemo-radiotherapy Surveillance in Patients With Oesophageal Cancer -a Feasibility Study.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors and Patterns of Recurrence After a Watchful Waiting Approach following Clinical Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- The biology and therapeutic implications of heterogeneity in Barrett oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Emerging innovation, artificial intelligence, and digital technology in esophagology.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Current status and perspectives of esophageal cancer: a comprehensive review.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Effective surveillance strategies are required for patients diagnosed with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) or adenocarcinoma (OAC) for whom chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is used as a potentially-curative, organ-sparing, alternative to surgery. In this study, we evaluated the safety, acceptability and tolerability of a non-endoscopic immunocytological device (the Cytosponge™) to assess treatment response following CRT. Methods: This multicentre, single-arm feasibility trial took place in 10 tertiary cancer centres in the UK. Patients aged at least 16 years diagnosed with OSCC or OAC, and who were within 4-16 weeks of completing definitive or neo-adjuvant CRT, were included. Participants were required to have a Mellow-Pinkas dysphagia score of 0-2 and be able to swallow tablets. All patients underwent a single Cytosponge™ assessment in addition to standard of care (which included post-treatment endoscopic evaluation with biopsy for patients undergoing definitive CRT; surgery for those who received neo-adjuvant CRT). The primary outcome was the proportion of consented, evaluable patients who successfully underwent Cytosponge™ assessment. Secondary and tertiary outcomes included safety, study consent rate, acceptance rate, the suitability of obtained samples for biomarker analysis, and the comparative efficacy of Cytosponge™ to standard histology (endoscopy and biopsy or post-resection specimen) in assessing for residual disease. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03529669. Findings: Between 18 Interpretation: Use of the Cytosponge Funding: Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.