ArticleOncology letters2025
Optimal treatment strategy for older patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Oncology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The appropriate treatment strategy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in older patients remains unclear. The efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy using a divided-dose regimen of biweekly docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was compared with upfront surgery (US) in patients aged ≥70 years with ESCC. The present study retrospectively analyzed the multicenter data of patients who received esophagectomy for ESCC between January 2015 and December 2021. The present study investigated patient prognosis using inverse probability weighting analysis and psoas muscle index (PMI) as a background factor for older patients with ESCC potentially deriving greater benefit from this NAC regimen. Among 86 eligible patients, 47 received NAC (NAC group) and 39 underwent US (US group). No significant differences were observed between the groups in 3-year overall survival [OS; hazard ratio (HR), 0.576; P=0.325) and 3-year recurrence-free survival (HR, 0.483; P=0.141). Among the patients with low PMI, 3-year OS was significantly prolonged in the NAC group vs. the US group (HR, 0.342; 95% CI, 0.144-0.812; P=0.015). In the older patients with ESCC, a divided-dose regimen of DCF did not improve prognosis. When the PMI is low, a biweekly DCF regimen may contribute to extending OS. Future prospective large studies are 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.