Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36309603›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023

Reply to Letter to the Editor regarding "Oncological outcomes of squamous cell carcinoma of the cervical esophagus treated with definitive (chemo-)radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis".

Armando De Virgilio, Andrea Costantino, Bianca Maria Festa, Giuseppe Mercante, Davide Franceschini, Ciro Franzese, Marta Scorsetti, Andrea Marrari, Raffaele Cavina, Salvatore Marano and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewLetter
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Armando De VirgilioDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Andrea CostantinoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy. andrea.costantino94@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5551-7785
Bianca Maria FestaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe MercanteDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Davide FranceschiniRadiotherapy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Ciro FranzeseDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Marta ScorsettiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Andrea MarrariOncology Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Raffaele CavinaOncology Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Salvatore MaranoDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal SurgeryDepartment of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Carlo CastoroDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe SprianoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Humanitas University · ITIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a previous study, we performed a meta-analysis of the oncological outcomes of patients suffering from cervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Further analysis was performed, and a random effect modeling showed a pooled local-regional failure rate of 41.4% (95% CI 32.2-50.8), and a pooled distant failure rate of 21.6% (95% CI 17.0-26.5). The included studies used a median radiotherapy (RT) dose of 61.2 Gy (95% CI 60.0-62.0, range 56.0-66.0), but we measured a non-significant impact of the RT dose on the pooled overall survival (OS), suggesting that an increased RT dose might not be related to an improved OS (p = 0.23). Further research should be conducted to define predictors and prognostic categories that may select the best treatment option for each patient.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Squamous CellEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaChemoradiotherapyHumansPrognosisChemoradiotherapyProximal esophagusRecurrenceRegional failureUpper esophagus

Identifiers

PMID36309603
PMCPMC11796946
OpenAlexW4307659028

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.