ArticleInternational journal of cancer2025
Hospital variation in treatment for synchronous metastatic esophageal and gastric cancer: A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hospital variation in treatment for synchronous metastatic esophageal and gastric cancer: A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands.International journal of cancer · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Care for metastatic esophageal (EC) or gastric cancer (GC) includes a large variety of treatment modalities. Data on treatment variation across centers are unknown. This study investigated treatment variation across hospitals and its effect on overall survival (OS) in the Netherlands by conducting a nationwide retrospective cohort study with population-based data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed with synchronous metastatic EC/GC between 2015 and 2022 were included. Multilevel logistic regression assessed treatment patterns according to hospital of diagnosis. OS was analyzed using Cox regression analysis after categorizing hospitals into tertiles based on their adjusted odds (low/medium/high) for systemic treatment (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy). Among 8406 EC and 3871 GC patients, the proportion receiving systemic treatment varied substantially: 19.8%-69.6% for EC and 15.8%-81.3% for GC across hospitals. Hospital of diagnosis was significantly associated with the adjusted probability of receiving systemic treatment (p < .0001). Ten out of 78 EC (12.8%) and 7 out of 73 (9.6%) GC hospitals had significantly lower systemic treatment probabilities. EC patients with OS ≥4 months diagnosed at hospitals with lower probabilities had significantly worse OS compared to high-probability hospitals (hazard ratios [HR] 0.87 [0.79-0.95] p = .002). GC patients from low-probability hospitals had significantly worse OS than from medium- (HR 0.86 [0.76-0.96], p = .011) or high-probability hospitals (HR 0.73 [0.64-0.82], p < .0001). In conclusion, this study showed substantial hospital variation in treatment for metastatic EC and GC. Hospital of diagnosis was not only associated with the probability of receiving systemic treatment but also OS. This reflects the challenge of ensuring equal healthcare access.
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.