ArticleNPJ precision oncology2026
Neoadjuvant sintilimab, albumin-bound paclitaxel, and carboplatin for locally advanced, resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: clinical study and mechanistic exploration.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neoadjuvant nedaplatin and paclitaxel regimen with concurrent radiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a single-arm phase II clinical trial.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Concurrent versus sequential immune checkpoint inhibition in the neoadjuvant treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2027Review
- Neoadjuvant sintilimab, albumin-bound paclitaxel, and carboplatin for locally advanced, resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: clinical study and mechanistic exploration.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Immune exhaustion in esophageal cancer: interferon pathway dysregulation and neoadjuvant therapy response.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The survival benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remain unclear, with treatment responses varying due to tumor microenvironment (TME) heterogeneity. In this phase II study, 24 patients received neoadjuvant sintilimab, albumin-bound paclitaxel, and carboplatin, with major pathological response (MPR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) as primary endpoints. Results showed a 41.7% MPR rate, with 3 year DFS and OS rates of 75.0% and 79.2%, respectively. The PD-L1 expression of all patients increased during treatment; and its post-treatment levels were more strongly associated with the response to PD-1 inhibitors than pre-treatment levels. Besides, the mass spectrometry-based proteomic quantification identified 9 downregulated proteins in responders, including immune regulation-related proteins and peptidyl-serine phosphorylation proteins, revealing the TME changes linked to therapy efficacy. Additionally, 14 differentially expressed proteins were found at baseline between responders and non-responders, with high CD44 expression correlating with a favorable anti-PD-1 response. Post-treatment analysis revealed 27 differential proteins, 10 of which negatively correlated with efficacy. In conclusion, neoadjuvant sintilimab plus chemotherapy demonstrates promising efficacy and safety. Proteomic profiling of the TME further elucidates the heterogeneity of immunotherapy responses, offering insights for precision strategies in ESCC neoadjuvant therapy. Trial registration This study was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000041081).
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.