ArticleThe British journal of surgery2023
Diagnosis and treatment for gastro-oesophageal cancer in England and Wales: analysis of the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) database 2012-2020.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating safety and quality of robotic-assisted gastric cancer surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of Centralizing Esophageal Cancer Surgery at High-Volume Centers on Long-Term Survival: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Patient experiences and decision-making priorities in early esophageal cancer: a qualitative interview study.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Perioperative immune-related adverse events in gastric cancer: a new challenge for surgical safety in the era of neoadjuvant immunotherapy.Gastroenterology report · 2026Article
- Efficacy and survival analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy in locally advanced resectable Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of the Top 50 Most Cited Articles on Iatrogenic Nerve Injuries of the Upper Limb Following Surgery.Journal of brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injury · 2025Review
- Opinion, uptake and current practice of robot-assisted upper gastrointestinal and oesophagogastric surgery in the UK: AUGIS national survey results.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024Article
- Article
- The bidirectional interplay between ncRNAs and methylation modifications in gastrointestinal tumors.International journal of biological sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) captures patient data from diagnosis to end of primary treatment for all patients with oesophagogastric (OG) cancer in England and Wales. This study assessed changes in patient characteristics, treatments received, and outcomes for OG cancer surgery for the period 2012-2020, and examined which factors may have led to changes in clinical outcomes over this time.
methodsPatients diagnosed with OG cancer between April 2012 and March 2020 were included. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographics, disease site, type, and stage, patterns of care, and outcomes over time. The treatment variables of unit case volume, surgical approach, and neoadjuvant therapy were included. Regression models were used to examine associations between surgical outcomes (duration of stay and mortality), and patient and treatment variables.
resultsIn total, 83 393 patients diagnosed with OG cancer during the study period were included. Patient demographics and cancer stage at diagnosis showed little change over time. Altogether, 17 650 patients underwent surgery as part of radical treatment. These patients had increasingly more advanced cancers, and a greater likelihood of pre-existing comorbidity in more recent years. Significant decreases in mortality rates and duration of stay were noted, along with improvements in oncological outcomes (nodal yields and margin positivity rates). Following adjustment for patient and treatment variables, increasing audit year and trust volume were associated, respectively, with improved postoperative outcomes: lower 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.93 (95 per cent c.i. 0.88 to 0.98) and OR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99-0.99)) and lower 90-day mortality (OR 0.94 (95 per cent c.i. 0.91 to 0.98) and OR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99-0.99)), and a reduction in duration of postoperative stay (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98 (95 per cent c.i. 0.97 to 0.98) and IRR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99 to 0.99)).
conclusionOutcomes of OG cancer surgery have improved over time, despite little evidence of improvements in early diagnosis. The underlying drivers for improvements in outcome are multifactorial.
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.