Observational studyCancer medicine2024
A propensity score-matched comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin-5FU and carboplatin-paclitaxel in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A Turkish oncology group study.
Observational study in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant treatment is the standard treatment in locally advanced ESCC. However, the optimal chemotherapy regimen is not known.
methodThis is a retrospective observational cohort study conducted with propensity score matching. Patients with resectable ESCC from 13 tertiary centers from Türkiye were screened between January 2011 and December 2021. We compared the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with the CF and the CROSS regimens in patients with ESCC.
resultsThree hundred and sixty-two patients were screened. Patients who received induction chemotherapy (n = 72) and CROSS-ineligible (n = 31) were excluded. Two hundred and fifty nine patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. After propensity score matching (n = 97 in both groups), the mPFS was 18.4 months (95% CI, 9.3-27.4) and 25.7 months (95% CI, 15.6-35.7; p = 0.974), and the mOS was 35.2 months (95% CI, 18.9-51.5) and 39.6 months (95% CI 20.1-59.2; p = 0.534), in the CF and the CROSS groups, respectively. There was no difference between subgroups regarding PFS and OS. Compared with the CF group, the CROSS group had a higher incidence of neutropenia (34.0% vs. 62.9%, p < 0.001) and anemia (54.6% vs. 75.3%, p = 0.003) in all grades. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in grade 3-4 anemia, grade 3-4 neutropenia, and febrile neutropenia between groups. There were more dose reductions and dose delays in the CROSS group than in the CF group (11.3% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.026 and 34.0% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.009, respectively). The resection rate was 52.6% in the CF-RT and 35.1% in the CROSS groups (p = 0.014).
conclusionFavorable PFS and pCR rates and a comparable OS were obtained with the CROSS regimen over the CF regimen as neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with ESCC.
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.