ArticleAnnals of surgery2025
A Novel TRG-N Prognostic Classification System for Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Neoadjuvant Therapy Followed by Esophagectomy: A Study Based on the Netherlands Cancer Registry.
Article in Annals of surgery, 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.
- Article
- Predictive model based on folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cells in neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for esophageal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Integrating tumor regression and nodal status for refined prognostication after neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer: where does TRG-N fit in the evolving global landscape?Translational cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a new prognostic classification system centered on tumor regression grade (TRG) and ypN stage that can effectively stratify overall survival (OS) of esophageal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy followed by R0 esophagectomy.
backgroundAlthough the prognostic value of combining TRG and ypN stage has been demonstrated, a prognostic classification system integrating these factors, trained using large-scale data, remains unavailable.
methodsData from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015-2022) were analyzed. A new TRG-N prognostic classification system for OS was developed by grouping patients based on cN stage, ypN stage, and TRG. The prognostic performance of the TRG-N classification was compared with the eighth edition AJCC ypTNM classification using 4 comparative metrics [log-rank χ², linear trend χ², Akaike information criterion (AIC), and C-index].
resultsA total of 3193 patients were included. Among patients with adenocarcinoma, the TRG-N classification showed superior linear trend χ² and AIC to the ypTNM classification. However, the log-rank χ² of the TRG-N classification was inferior to that of the ypTNM classification, with no significant difference in the C-index ( P =0.206) between the 2 systems. Among patients with squamous cell carcinoma, the TRG-N classification significantly outperformed the ypTNM classification in log-rank χ², linear trend χ², AIC, and C-index ( P =0.018).
conclusionsThe TRG-N classification demonstrated comparable prognostic performance to the AJCC ypTNM classification for esophageal adenocarcinoma but showed superior prognostic value for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, making it a potentially more effective tool for risk stratification in esophageal cancer patients.
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.