ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024
Survival outcomes of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy versus chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Pan-Squamous Cell Carcinomas: A Meta-Analysis of Esophageal, Head and Neck, Cervical, Lung, Cutaneous, and Oral Squamous Cell Carcinomas.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer.Cancers · 2026Review
- Association of sarcopenia with pathologic complete response in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Prognostic impact of advanced lung cancer inflammation index and tumor load index in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- The enhanced pathological response from additional immunotherapy improved recurrence-free survival for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multi-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Status quo of hypercoagulation as a prognostic indicator following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
- Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study with 2-year survival analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Efficacy evaluation and prognostic prediction of endoscopic ultrasound for neoadjuvant immunotherapy in esophageal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Neoadjuvant therapy-associated malignant phenotype score predicts prognosis and highlights the roles of MIF signaling and DUXAP8 in ESCC.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of combined neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is the standard preoperative treatment for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Some studies reported neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) could improve pathological response with manageable safety. However, few studies have compared the efficacy and safety of NICT and NCT, especially survival outcomes. In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of NICT and NCT after a median follow-up of 36.0 months.
methodsThis was a retrospective study with a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Locally advanced ESCC patients treated with neoadjuvant sintilimab plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy were reviewed. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS).
resultsForty-five patients were identified in each group by PSM. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate in NICT and NCT group were 28.9% and 8.9% (P = 0.02). The hazard ratio (HR) was 0.396 (95% CI 0.171-0.919, p = 0.025) for RFS and 0.377 (95% CI 0.145-0.981, p = 0.038) for overall survival (OS), 3-year RFS was 80.6% and 62.1%, 3-year OS was 86.2% and 68.1%. Patients with pCR, MPR or downstaging had better 3-year RFS and 3-year OS. The incidences of postoperative complications and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were similar.
conclusionThis trial preliminarily shows that NICT improves pathological and survival outcomes over NCT for resectable locally advanced ESCC, with acceptable and manageable safety.
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.