Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40846774›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Clinical features, treatment and prognosis analysis of distant metastatic esophageal cancer.

Shuang Li, Yanwei Lu, Ruiqi Liu, Luanluan Huang, Ding Nan, Xiaoyan Chen, Wenjie Xia, Xiaodong Liang, Haibo Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Shuang Li *Center for Rehabilitation Medicine, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine Research Institute of Zhejiang Province, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital), Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Yanwei Lu *Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Ruiqi LiuCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Luanluan HuangCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Ding NanCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Xiaoyan ChenCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Wenjie XiaGeneral Surgery, Cancer Center, Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated People's Hospital, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Xiaodong LiangCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. lxdctopone@sina.com.
Haibo ZhangCancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital (Affiliated People's Hospital) , Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. zhbdoctor@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the most common malignant tumors in China. EC is characterized by a poor clinical prognosis, with many patients being diagnosed at advanced stages. This study utilized data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The clinical features, treatment, and prognostic factors of patients with distant metastatic EC were screened and analyzed, and a nomogram was drawn to construct a predictive model. Eligible patients with distant metastatic EC diagnosed from January 2004 to December 2015 were extracted from the SEER database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to eliminate group baseline differences.The data were divided into the training cohort (1116 cases) and validation cohort (426 cases) by using R software and random sampling function at the ratio of 7:3. The baseline table was plotted using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier curve, log-rank test, and Cox regression were used for survival analysis. C-index and AUC were used to evaluate the performance of the prognosis model. The calibration curve was used to evaluate the calibration of the model. Using the data of the validation cohort, external validation is used to create a prediction model. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and PSM, a total of 1542 cases diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 were included in the study. We analyzed the Kaplan-Meier survival of patients with metastatic EC before and after PSM, focusing on different treatment methods. The results indicated that radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgical treatment provided significant survival benefits to patients with metastatic EC(P < 0.05). Univariate and Multivariate regression analysis showed that T-stage, M-stage, primary site, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy were independent prognostic factors affecting the prognosis of distant metastatic EC (P < 0.05). Evaluating the predictive ability of the nomogram, the C index of the training cohort was 0.69 (95% CI 0.67-0.71), and the C-index of the validation cohort was 0.659 (95% CI 0.627-0.693)0.6606 patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study's external validation group. In this group, the AUC values of our external validation model for 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival (OS) were 0.775 (95% CI 0.762-0.787), 0.790 (95% CI 0.744-0.807). The C-index was 0.726. The AUC values for both the training and validation cohorts for the 1-year OS ranged from 0.50 to 0.70, and the AUC for the rest of the training and validation cohort ranged from 0.70 to 0.90, which suggests that the model is moderately discriminating. The calibration curves of 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years in the two groups are very close to the 45° reference line, suggesting that the models exhibit a good degree of calibration. The C-index, the AUC, and calibration curves suggest that the models have good discriminating and calibration. The results reveal that the T stage, M stage, primary tumor site, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy play an important role in influencing the treatment effect and prognosis of patients. The nomogram prediction model, which is based on these independent risk factors, shows good discriminative ability and calibration.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsAdultAgedChinaFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNomogramsPrognosisSEER ProgramDistant metastatic oesophageal cancerPrediction modelPSMSEER database

Identifiers

PMID40846774
PMCPMC12373775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.