Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38694352›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024

Effect of cervical paraesophageal lymph node metastasis versus supraclavicular lymph node metastasis on the overall survival of patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: an observational study.

Kexun Li, Changding Li, Simiao Lu, Wenwu He, Chenghao Wang, Yongtao Han, Xuefeng Leng, Lin Peng

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cervical lymph node metastases in thoracic esophageal cancer: a systematic review.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kexun LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Changding LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Simiao LuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Wenwu HeDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Chenghao WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Yongtao HanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Xuefeng LengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Lin PengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Sichuan Cancer Hospital), Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Sichuan Cancer Hospital · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Esophageal cancer (EC) is a major global health burden, with a particularly high incidence in East Asia. The authors aimed to investigate the effect of metastasis in cervical paraesophageal lymph nodes (station 101) and supraclavicular lymph nodes (station 104) on the survival of patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the database of the authors' hospital. The authors retrospectively analyzed the patients with EC who underwent esophagectomy from January 2010 to December 2017. These patients were allocated into two groups based on the presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in the cervical paraesophageal or supraclavicular regions. Clinical outcomes and survival data were compared using the TNM staging system of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). Results: After a median follow-up of 62.1 months, 122 patients with LNM in the supraclavicular region were included in the study. Among these patients, 53 showed cervical paraesophageal LNM and an overall survival (OS) of 19.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 16.3-23.5]. In contrast, 69 patients showed supraclavicular LNM with an OS of 34.9 months (95% CI 25.7-44.1). The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 77%, 29%, and 21%, respectively, for patients with cervical paraesophageal LNM. Moreover, patients with supraclavicular LNM demonstrated OS rates of 88%, 48%, and 34%, respectively [Hazard ratio (HR): 0.634, 95% CI: 0.402-1.000, Conclusions: Patients with ESCC with cervical paraesophageal LNM had significantly worse OS than those with supraclavicular LNM. This study underscores the importance of accurately identifying and managing ESCC with cervical paraesophageal LNM, as it may require more tailored and aggressive treatment strategies to prolong patient survival.

Indexed as

cervical paraesophageal lymph node metastasisesophageal squamous cell carcinomaesophagectomylymphadenectomysupraclavicular lymph node metastasis

Identifiers

PMID38694352
PMCPMC11060193
OpenAlexW4392887721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.