ArticleCancer medicine2024
High incidence of lung cancer death after curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of combined use of magnifying narrow-band imaging/blue laser imaging and Lugol chromoendoscopy for tumor extent delineation in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2026Article
- Article
- Construction of a novel tool for predicting chronic obstructive pulmonary disease mortality in lung cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical features of early esophageal neoplastic lesions at different stages and efficacy and prognosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Feasibility and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial cancer of the remnant esophagus after esophagectomy.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- High incidence of lung cancer death after curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Cancer medicine · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimFollowing treatment of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), surveillance for a second primary malignancy (SPM) is necessary. However, detailed evidence regarding the timing and prognosis of SPMs is insufficient. We aimed to clarify the details of SPMs and their effects on patient outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective, multicenter study involved 11 hospitals. Patients with superficial ESCC curatively resected using endoscopic submucosal dissection between May 2005 and December 2012, were included in this study.
resultsThe 5-year survival rate of 187 patients was 92.6% during a median follow-up duration of 96.8 months. Thirty-one patients died, 14 of whom died of SPMs. Compared to patients with SPMs detectable by esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), patients with SPMs detectable only by modalities other than EGD had a significantly higher mortality rate (p < 0.001). Patients with second primary lung cancer (LC) had a high mortality rate (56.3%). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that multiple Lugol-voiding lesions (LVLs) tended to be associated with SPMs (p = 0.077, hazard ratio [HR] 4.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-6.50), and metachronous ESCC was an independent risk factor for the incidence of second primary LC (p = 0.037, HR 3.51, 95% CI: 1.08-11.41).
conclusionsSPMs that cannot be detected by EGD, such as LC, must be considered after the curative resection of ESCC. We suggest strict screening by both EGD and computed tomography for patients with multiple LVLs or metachronous ESCC to detect SPMs in their early stages.
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.