ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus immunotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients: efficacy and safety outcomes.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a network meta-analysis and real-world study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy versus Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Reconstructed Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Association between tumor volume changes during neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and survival outcomes in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- A meta-analysis based on propensity analysis studies comparing neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Discover oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recent advancements in immunotherapy have demonstrated promising results across various solid tumors, prompting the exploration of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (NICT) as a potential alternative. This study sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of NICT in comparison with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) for patients with resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) undergoing radical esophagectomy. Methods: From January 2019 to September 2023, a total of 472 patients with locally advanced ESCC who met the eligibility criteria were recruited from three different medical centers. All patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy prior to radical esophagectomy. Among them, 252 patients treated with the NCRT regimen, and 220 patients treated with the NICT regimen. To reduce the influence of potential confounding factors between the two cohorts, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied. Results: Following PSM, an analysis was conducted on 350 patients who received either NCRT or NICT, with 175 individuals in each cohort. The NCRT cohort exhibited a significantly greater rate of pathological complete response (pCR) than the NICT cohort (44.57% Conclusions: The NCRT cohort exhibited greater rates of pCR and lymph node pCR rates than the NICT cohort. Conversely, the NICT group presented with fewer postoperative complications the NCRT group.
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.