ReviewEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2023
Clinical predictors of special type of esophageal cancer.
Review 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal cancers with a histological type other than the two major types, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma, are referred to as "special type of esophageal cancer" (STEC). STEC is rare and difficult to diagnose preoperatively. Therefore, we aimed to clarify the clinicopathological findings of STEC, including magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging (ME-NBI).
methodsWe reviewed 1133 lesions in 936 consecutive cases who underwent endoscopic resection or surgical resection for primary esophageal cancer. Patients were classified into the SCC group and the STEC group, respectively. Factors that predict STEC endoscopically, as well as clinicopathologic features of STEC compared to SCC, were examined.
resultsTwenty-eight STECs were diagnosed in 28 patients: 15 with basaloid squamous cell carcinoma, 6 with adenosquamous carcinoma, 4 with mucoepidermoid carcinoma, 1 with carcinosarcoma, 1 with salivary duct-type carcinoma, and 1 with neuroendocrine cell carcinoma. There was significantly more pT1b or deeper cancer (60.7% vs. 12.8%), lymphovascular invasion (50.0% vs. 11.1%) and elevated type (53.6% vs. 16.1%) in the STEC group. The proportion of lesions with type R vessels on ME-NBI was significantly higher in the STEC group (46.4% vs. 3.9%). The STEC group had significantly lower accuracy of ME-NBI for prediction of depth (64.3% vs. 83.5%) and a greater proportion of underestimated lesions (32.1% vs. 9.3%). In the multivariate analysis, the histopathology of STEC was associated with type R vessels on ME-NBI.
conclusionType R vessels and submucosal tumor-like elevation might be the clinical predictors of STEC.
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.