ArticleJournal of translational medicine2025
Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal treatment strategy for patients with borderline resectable (cT3br) esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and prognoses between neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy (NACI) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) in cT3br ESCC patients.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients with cT3br ESCC who received either NACI or NCRT followed by surgery between January 2016 and December 2022 were identified. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize the influence of confounding factors. Survival curves were constructed and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier log-rank survival analysis.
results97 patients with cT3br ESCC received NACI and 111 received NCRT. After PSM, the R0 resection rate (85.7% vs. 90.5%, P = 0.341) and pCR rate (19.0% vs. 26.2%, P = 0.269) were comparable between two groups, while the MPR rate in the NACI group was significantly lower than in the NCRT group (32.1% vs. 56.0%, P = 0.002). However, NCRT was associated with a greater risk of severe postoperative complications (21.4% vs. 6.0%, P = 0.004). The 3-year overall survival (69.4% vs. 55.7%, P = 0.242), disease-free survival (55.7% vs. 49.7%, P = 0.242), overall recurrence (32.1% vs. 29.8%, P = 0.739), and recurrence patterns were comparable between the NACI and NCRT groups.
conclusionNACI followed by surgery appears to be a safe and effective treatment strategy for patients with borderline resectable ESCC.
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.