ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Propensity-matched study on locally advanced esophageal cancer: surgery versus post-operative radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Postoperative radiotherapy for resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Postoperative adjuvant therapy for pT3N0M0 esophageal carcinoma: does radiotherapy offer added benefit beyond chemotherapy?Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Risk model based on adenylate uridylate (AU)-rich elements genes for assessing esophageal cancer prognosis and immune landscape.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable cT3-4a esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A matched cohort analysis.Precision radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Prognostic impact of treatment modalities and examined lymph nodes count on survival in T3-4 esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort and predictive modeling study from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Efficacy of surgery versus definitive chemoradiotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in T4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Deep learning models based on CT predict prognosis in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy and chemotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- The role of the complement system in the response to cytotoxic therapy.Seminars in immunology · 2025Review
- Global, regional, and national epidemiology and risk factors of geriatric digestive system cancers from 1990 to 2021.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Recurrence patterns and prognosis of esophageal cancer patients based on the Rbr resection status.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Prognostic role of effective radiation dose to immune cells in esophageal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation.PloS one · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to delineate the long-term outcomes and recurrence patterns of locally advanced thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC) patients managed with or without postoperative radiotherapy (PORT).
methodsA retrospective cohort from two academic centers, encompassing patients who initially underwent esophagectomy and were pathologically staged T3-4, was analyzed. Survival outcomes were constructed using Kaplan-Meier method, with survival significance was evaluated using the log-rank test. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to balance potential selection bias.
resultsAmong the 506 patients, 251 underwent surgery alone and 255 received radiotherapy following radical surgery. With a median follow-up of 49.1 months, PORT significantly improved 5-year overall survival (53.8% vs. 25.3%; p < 0.001) and 5-year disease-free survival rates (45.3% vs. 8.5%; p < 0.001) compared to surgery alone. These differences in survival outcomes persisted even after PSM (p < 0.001 for both). Treatment failure was significantly less frequent in the PORT group (46.7%) compared to the surgery-only group (90.0%; p < 0.001), with corresponding reductions in locoregional recurrence (9.4% vs. 54.1%; p < 0.001). This underscores the significant association between PORT and disease control.
conclusionThe absence of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy highlights the importance of PORT in improving survival and reducing recurrence in advanced T3-4 TESCC patients. This study underscores the importance of PORT as a salvage treatment for locally advanced TESCC patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
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.