ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2025
Stop Canceling Surgery for Esophageal Cancer: An Analysis of Treatment Related Mortality in 60 000 Patients.
Article in Journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Framework for estimating the financial contribution of a benign foregut practice: What general thoracic surgeons need to know.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Does the Dutch trial prove we should "say no" to active surveillance? An in-depth review of the 2025 study on the treatment of esophageal cancer.JTCVS open · 2025Article
- Stop Canceling Surgery for Esophageal Cancer: An Analysis of Treatment Related Mortality in 60 000 Patients.Journal of surgical oncology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
methodsSurgical esophagectomy is falsely regarded as contributing little survival in resectable, early-stage disease in favor of nonsurgical treatment with definitive chemoradiation (dCR). We examine surgery in treatment by evaluating large-scale trends in mortality. The SEER database was queried for esophageal cancer patients from 2004 to 2020. Total of 59 754; 19 806 squamous and 34 484 adenocarcinoma. The primary outcome was the hazard ratio for overall survival defined as time from diagnosis-to-death. Differences between patients were assessed using χ
resultsA total of 47 170 (78.9%) did not undergo surgery and 12 584 (21.1%) received surgery. The hazard ratio for patients undergoing dCR for SCC was 1.929. The hazard ratio for treatment with dCR compared to chemoradiation-followed-by-surgery (CRS) was 2.151 and for adenocarcinoma 2.386. Further analyses highlight groups under similar clinical conditions; including multivariate analysis, T-Stage, overall stage, surgical era, and surgery refusal. In every category, the risk of mortality was higher in dCR compared to CRS.
conclusionsSurgery combined with chemoradiation, and/or surgery alone, confers a significant survival benefit over dCR in resectable patients. DISCUSSION: Surgery should be considered early in medically fit patients with operable disease.
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.