ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024
Comparison of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study with 3-year survival analysis.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Phase 2 randomized trial (REVO).Nature communications · 2025Trial
- Long-term outcome of neoadjuvant tislelizumab plus chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2025Article
- Prognostic Value of the PILE Score in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The enhanced pathological response from additional immunotherapy improved recurrence-free survival for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multi-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a real-world retrospective study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- The prognostic power of major pathological response in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy: a multi-center cohort study.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- CT-based habitat radiomics for predicting treatment response to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in esophageal cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT) for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) has shown short-term benefits, but long-term survival outcomes are unclear. This study compares nCIT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) in resectable ESCC. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on ESCC patients who underwent nCT or nCIT followed by esophagectomy. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a caliper of 0.02 was employed to minimize bias. The primary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsA total of 131 comparable pairs of ESCC patients receiving nCT and nCIT were selected for the final analysis. The nCIT had higher rates of pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (mPR) compared to nCT. Additionally, nCIT led to significant tumor down-staging, higher rates of R0 resection, and increased lymph node clearance during surgery. Patients who received nCIT exhibited improved disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at the 3-year follow-up. The incidence of distant and mixed relapses was lower in the nCIT group compared to the nCT group. However, the risk of locoregional relapse was comparable between the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the benefits of nCIT were generally observed across most patient subgroups. Interestingly, in patients without pCR or mPR, nCIT still demonstrated better survival benefits than nCT.
conclusionnCIT demonstrated superior pathological response rates and improved 3-year DFS and OS compared to nCT alone in locally advanced ESCC, but long-term survival validation is needed.
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.