ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2025
Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study with 2-year survival analysis.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer recommended for surgery but treated non-surgically: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Perioperative outcomes following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.The Journal of international medical research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) has shown encouraging short-term outcomes in patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but data on long-term survival remain limited. This study compared the therapeutic efficacy, safety, and 2-year survival outcomes of NICT versus surgery alone.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients with locally advanced resectable ESCC who underwent either NICT followed by surgery or upfront surgery alone. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsA total of 188 patients were included, with 60 receiving NICT and 128 undergoing surgery alone. The NICT group achieved better 2-year DFS (76.7% vs. 57.0%, P = 0.021) and OS (86.7% vs. 68.0%, P = 0.0053), with similar rates of postoperative complications (40.0% vs. 37.5%, P = 0.742). No ≥ grade 3 postoperative complications occurred in the NICT group, while three cases (2.3%) were observed in the surgery-alone group. Pathological responses to NICT included 28.3% complete response (pCR) and 61.7% major response (MPR). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 20.0% of NICT patients, with no grade ≥ 4 events. Patients achieving pCR or MPR had significantly better survival outcomes than non-responders. Survival outcomes were similar between 2-cycle and > 2-cycle NICT regimens. ECOG performance status, coronary artery disease, and treatment modality were identified as independent prognostic factors.
conclusionNICT followed by surgery demonstrated favorable pathological response and 2-year survival outcomes in locally advanced ESCC, supporting its potential as a neoadjuvant strategy pending further prospective validation.
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.