Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39180700›Full record

ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2024

Validation of the cutoff values for the number of metastatic lymph nodes for esophageal cancer staging: a multi-institutional analysis of 655 patients in Japan.

Koji Tanaka, Takeo Fujita, Yasuaki Nakajima, Akihiko Okamura, Kenro Kawada, Masayuki Watanabe, Yuichiro Doki

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors.

Koji TanakaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-5178-9388
Takeo FujitaDepartment of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa-Shi, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan. takfujit@east.ncc.go.jp.
Yasuaki NakajimaDepartment of Surgery, Edogawa Hospital, 2-24-18 Higashi-Koiwa, Edogawa-ku, Tokyo, 133-0052, Japan.
Akihiko OkamuraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Kenro KawadaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Masayuki WatanabeDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Yuichiro DokiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of metastatic lymph nodes (LNs) is an important prognostic factor for esophageal cancer, and N staging is important for prognostic stratification. The optimal cutoff values for clinical (cN) and pathologic N (pN) staging should be reconsidered following advances in neoadjuvant therapy.

methodsThe study included 655 patients who underwent esophagectomy between January 2014 and December 2016 in four high-volume centers in Japan. Optimal cutoff values for the number of metastatic LNs in cN and pN staging were examined using X-tile, and their prognostic performance was validated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

resultsThe cutoff values were 1, 2, and 3 for cN staging and 1, 3, and 7 for pN staging. Prognosis was significantly better in patients with cN0 than in those with modified (m)-cN1 (p = 0.0211). However, prognosis was not significantly different among the patients with m-cN1, m-cN2, and m-cN3 disease. Prognosis was significantly different among the patients with pN0, pN1, pN2, and pN3 disease (pN0 vs pN1, p < 0.0001; pN1 vs pN2, p < 0.0001; pN2 vs pN3, p < 0.0001). In patients who received preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, prognosis, which was not significantly different among the patients with cN0, m-cN1, m-cN2, and m-cN3 disease (cN0 vs m-cN1, p = 0.5675; m-cN1 vs m-cN2, p = 0.4425; m-cN2 vs m-cN3, p = 0.7111), was significantly different among the patients with pN0, pN1, pN2, and pN3 disease (pN0 vs pN1, p = 0.0025; pN1 vs pN2, p = 0.0046; pN2 vs pN3, p = 0.0104).

conclusionscN has no prognostic impact in patients who underwent preoperative treatment followed by esophagectomy, despite the optimization of cN classification. The conventional TNM8th pN classification is useful for predicting prognosis even for patients who have undergone preoperative treatment. The conventional cutoffs for metastatic LNs in the International Union against Cancer tumor node metastasis staging system are valid and can be effectively used in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesNeoplasm StagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansJapanKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyPrognosisEsophageal cancerLymph node metastasisPrognosisStaging

Identifiers

PMID39180700
PMCPMC11405470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.