ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery versus definitive chemoradiation in ESCC: real-world data.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an aggressive malignancy that has poor survival. Management of ESCC depends on the resectability of the disease, certain patient characteristics, fitness for surgery, and the anatomic complexity of the disease location. Treatment options include either Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCR) followed by surgery or definitive Chemoradiation (DCR). While randomized trials have provided insights into both strategies, no large-scale retrospective real-world studies have been conducted to compare these approaches in diverse, unselected populations. This study assesses real-world outcomes of NCR versus DCR using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the NCDB, focusing on patients with ESCC from 2004 to 2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) was utilized. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were employed. Results: N = 386 patients with esophageal cancer, with a median age of 64 years (IQR, 57.0-70.0), were identified. Patients were evenly distributed between the DCR and NCR groups, with a total of N = 193 participants. We further selected patients with ESCC, a total of N = 311 patients. NCR demonstrated a significantly extended overall survival (OS) compared to those who received DCR, with a median of 33.15 months vs. 20.5 months (P-value: 0.0069), respectively. Patients receiving DCR had significantly worse OS compared to patients receiving NCR with HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.05-1.81, p=0.0206. Patients with tumors in the thoracic esophagus (C15.3) showed significant survival benefit from surgery (p=0.0070), whereas no benefit was seen for cervical tumors (C15.0), likely due to anatomical complexity and limited sample size. Conclusion: NCR followed by surgery, when feasible, offers survival benefits for patients with ESCC, especially for locally advanced tumors in the thoracic esophagus.
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.