Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38196527›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2023

Comparison of clinicopathological features and survival analysis between esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma based on the SEER database, alongside nomogram analysis for esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma.

Zhen Lin, Yue-Yun Chen, Chun-Hua Liu, Francesco Panzuto, Robert A Ramirez, Matthias Lang, Hyunchul Kim, Zhen-Yu Ding

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Zhen Lin *Department of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yue-Yun Chen *Department of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Chun-Hua Liu *Department of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Francesco PanzutoDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Digestive Disease Unit, Sant' Andrea University Hospital, ENETS Center of Excellence, Rome, Italy.
Robert A RamirezDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Matthias LangDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hyunchul KimDepartment of Pathology, CHA Ilsan Medical Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Zhen-Yu DingDepartment of Biotherapy, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan University · CNNational Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital · KRSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DEVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma (ENEC) is a rare subtype of esophageal cancer (EC). It presents distinctive clinical and pathological features in comparison to esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). To better elucidate the disparities between the two and establish a prognostic prediction model for ENEC, we conducted this study. Methods: Data of ENEC and ESCC patients (1975 to 2016) were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Patients with a confirmed pathological diagnosis of ENEC and ESCC were enrolled in the study. The Chi-square test was employed to compare categorical variables, and the median survival time was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier curve. Training and validation groups were randomly assigned at a ratio of 7:3. Factors with a significance level of <0.05 in the multifactor regression model as well as age were integrated into the nomogram model. Concordance index (C-index), calibration curves, and decision curve analyses (DCA) were generated for model validation. Results: This study encompassed a total of 737 ENEC patients and 29,420 ESCC. Compared to ESCC, ENEC patients had higher probability of liver metastasis (13.8% Conclusions: ENEC and ESCC exhibit distinct clinicopathological features. Patients with ENEC experience significantly poorer survival outcomes compared to those with ESCC. Surgical intervention, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy significantly improve OS and DSS for ENEC patients. The nomogram prediction model, constructed based on age, race, stage, and treatment regimen, demonstrates accurate and effective predictive capabilities for prognostic factors in ENEC patients.

Indexed as

Esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma (ENEC)esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC)nomogramprognosispropensity score matching (PSM)

Identifiers

PMID38196527
PMCPMC10772701
OpenAlexW4390350132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.