ArticleCancer medicine2023
Optimal starting age of endoscopic screening for esophageal cancer in China: A multicenter prospective cohort study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Esophageal cancer: from pathogenesis to precision therapies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Long-term trends in disease burden of esophageal cancer in China and the forecast until 2050.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- The global, regional, and national burden of early, middle, and late-onset esophageal cancer and trends from 1990 to 2021: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Review
- Global, regional, and national burden of esophageal cancer: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Biomarker research · 2025Article
- Article
- Optimal starting age of endoscopic screening for esophageal cancer in China: A multicenter prospective cohort study.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough endoscopic screening for esophageal cancer has been performed in high-risk areas in China for decades, there is limited and inconsistent evidence regarding the starting age for individuals participating in screening. The aim of this study is to investigate the optimal starting age of esophageal cancer screening.
methodsThis study is based on a multicenter prospective cohort consisting 338,017 permanent residents aged 40-69 years in six high-risk areas of esophageal cancer in China. The participation rate, detection rate, hazard ratios (HRs), cumulative incidence and mortality and number needed to screen (NNS) were calculated in each age group. Screening burden, benefit and risk were compared among screening strategies with different initiation ages to explore the optimal starting age for population-based screening in high-risk areas.
resultsIndividuals aged 50-69 had a higher participation rate, a higher detection rate and improved screening effectiveness than those aged 40-49. The endoscopic screening had no significant effect on reducing the incidence of esophageal cancer in individuals under 55 and mortality in individuals under 45. Increasing the starting age to 50 years reduced the screening demand and NNS by 40% and 55%, and resulted in 12% of detectable positive cases, 16% of preventable incident cases, and 14% of preventable deaths being missed.
conclusionsPostponing the starting age of endoscopic screening to 50 years might yield a more-favorable balance between screening benefit and burden in high- risk areas with limited resources.
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.