ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2023
Perioperative therapy landscape for locally advanced, resectable esophageal cancer: an updated literature review.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival and Pathologic Response After Neoadjuvant Treatment in Esophagogastric Cancer: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Response-adapted perioperative therapy for resectable esophageal cancer in the immunotherapy era: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Prognostic value of glycemic variability for ICU and in-hospital all-cause mortality in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Review
- Case report: Innovative approach to esophageal cancer with right aortic arch: neoadjuvant immunotherapy and 3D reconstruction.Frontiers in oncology · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: The poor oncologic outcomes associated with esophageal cancer (EC) are primarily due to its presentation at an advanced stage and patient comorbidities. While multimodal therapy improves overall outcomes, there is a lack of uniform practice in terms of perioperative management, partly because this is a rapidly evolving field in a heterogeneous patient population. With numerous recent studies incorporating precision medicine with radiographic, pathologic, and genomic biomarkers and with emerging trials using targeted therapies, it is necessary for providers who care for these patients to be familiar with the current and evolving treatment standards to optimize patient outcomes. The objective of this paper is to perform an updated review of the main historical and recently emerging studies that impact the perioperative management of patients with locally advanced, upfront-resectable EC. Methods: We mined and reviewed PubMed and American Society of Clinical Oncology databases for pivotal works shaping the current perioperative treatment landscape in locally advanced EC. Key Content and Findings: EC are a vastly heterogeneous disease, and treatment options vary based on tumor anatomic location, histology, and patient comorbidities. Perioperative chemotherapy (CTX), chemoradiation (CRT), and, recently, immunotherapy have improved survival in patients with locally advanced disease. However, optimizing sequencing, de-escalating therapy, and incorporating novel targeted therapies in the perioperative setting are promising strategies that are under ongoing investigation to improve patient outcomes further. Conclusions: There is an ongoing need to identify predictive biomarkers and novel treatment strategies to personalize perioperative approaches and optimize outcomes of patients with EC.
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.