ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Comparative genomic analysis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma among different geographic regions.
Article 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular subtyping-guided precision therapy for ESCC: biomarker-driven strategies and clinical translation pathways.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Ethnic genomic diversity in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- The Interplay Between Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Its Tumor Microenvironment: Toward Innovative Therapies.Cells · 2025Review
- Scaling for African Inclusion in High-Throughput Whole Cancer Genome Bioinformatic Workflows.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
- Deciphering the Prognostic Landscape of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A PANoptosis-Related Gene Signature.Journal of Cancer · 2025Article
- A recurrence-predictive model based on eight genes and tumor mutational burden/microsatellite instability status in Stage II/III colorectal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) shows remarkable variation in incidence, survival, and risk factors. Although the genomic characteristics of ESCC have been extensively characterized, the genomic differences between different geographic regions remain unclear. Methods: In this study, we sequenced 111 patients with ESCC from northern (NC) and southern (SC) China, combined their data with those of 1081 cases from previous reports, and performed a comparative analysis among different regions. In total, 644 ESCC cases were collected from six geographic regions (NC, SC, Xinjiang, China [XJC], Japan [JP], Vietnam [VN], and Europe & America [EA]) as the discovery cohort. Validation cohort 1 included 437 patients with ESCC from the NC region. Validation cohort 2 included 54 and 57 patients from the NC and SC regions, respectively. Results: Patients with ESCC in different regions had different genomic characteristics, including DNA signatures, tumor mutation burdens, significantly mutated genes (SMGs), altered signaling pathways, and genes associated with clinical features. Based on both the DNA mutation signature and the mutation profile of the most common genes, the NC and SC groups were clustered close together, followed by the JP, XJC, EA, and VN groups. Compared to patients with ESCC from SC, SMGs, including Conclusions: Our study provides insights into genomic differences in ESCC among different regions. These differences may be related to differences in environmental carcinogens, incidence, and survival.
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.