ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2023
Prognostic impact of endoscopic response evaluation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a nationwide validation study.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of pathologic complete response using deep neural network-based endoscopic evaluation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a nationwide multicenter retrospective study from 46 Japanese esophageal centers.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- Outcome research on esophagectomy analyzed using nationwide databases in Japan: evidences generated from real-world data.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Review
- Recurrence-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.The British journal of surgery · 2024Article
- Article
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 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur previous study reported the prognostic significance of endoscopic response (ER) evaluation, defined ER, and revealed ER as an independent prognostic factor of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and surgery. The present study aimed to validate the prognostic impact of ER using a nationwide database from the authorized institute for board-certified esophageal surgeons by the Japan Esophageal Society.
methodsThis study retrospectively reviewed patients with ESCC who underwent subtotal esophagectomy at 85 authorized institutes for esophageal cancer from 2010 to 2015. Patients were classified as ER when the tumor size was markedly reduced post-NAC compared to pre-NAC. The correlation between OS and RFS was investigated.
resultsOf 4781 patients initially enrolled, 3636 were selected for subsequent analysis. Of them, 642 (17.7%) patients were classified as the ER group. Patients with ER showed significantly better OS and RFS. Subgroup analysis revealed the statistical difference in OS and RFS in cStage II and III, while the magnitude of survival difference between ER and non-ER was not evident in cStage I and IV. The percentage of ER varied from 46 to 87% among groups when institutions were classified into 3 subgroups based on the hospital volume, which would indicate the interinstitutional inconsistency.
conclusionsThe prognostic impact of ER was validated using a nationwide database. Standardization of ER evaluation is required to improve the interinstitutional consistency and clinical validity of the ER evaluation.
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.