ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Center2024
Clinicopathological and therapeutic comparisons of esophageal cancer between China and the USA: a multicenter hospital-based study.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Center, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global trends and hotspots in oxidative stress and esophageal cancer research: a comprehensive bibliometric and visualized analysis based on the Web of Science Core Collection (1998-2026).Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- CircPRKCA facilitates esophageal squamous cell carcinoma metastasis via m5C-dependent CSF2 mRNA stabilization.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Global, regional, and national burden of esophageal cancer: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Biomarker research · 2025Article
- Neoadjuvant therapy-associated malignant phenotype score predicts prognosis and highlights the roles of MIF signaling and DUXAP8 in ESCC.Frontiers in immunology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Esophageal cancer (EC) remains a global health challenge due to its poor prognosis. China and the United States of America (USA) represent two distinct epicenters of EC burden. Understanding the EC disparities in these two countries is vital for tailoring prevention strategies, optimizing treatment, and enhancing outcomes in both countries. Yet, there lacks a comprehensive comparison of EC characteristics between the two countries. Methods: In this multicenter, retrospective hospital-based study, we enrolled primary EC patients who received their initial treatment at one of 23 hospitals in China during 2016-2017. Using electronic medical records and cancer registration records, information on demographics, lifestyle, and clinicopathological characteristics (including tumor site, pathology, stage, metastases, differentiation, and treatment) were collected. Additionally, we compared these data with the clinicopathological information of invasive EC patients diagnosed in 2016-2017 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database in the USA. Results: A total of 6,658 EC patients in China and 8,555 EC patients in the USA were included finally. 85.5% ( Conclusions: This study reveals notable disparities in EC between China and the USA, encompassing epidemiological, clinicopathological, and treatment dimensions. These findings provide insight for tailored strategies addressing regional variations in clinicopathological and therapeutic characteristics.
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.