SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
A meta-analysis of published data on the efficacy and safety of radiotherapy combined with systemic therapy in advanced esophageal carcinoma.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chemoimmunotherapy or chemotherapy-based drug therapy is the preferred treatment for advanced esophageal cancer. However, the prognosis of patients is poor, there is an urgent need to explore more effective combined treatment strategies to improve survival outcomes. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined treatment with chemoimmunotherapy or chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched using a combination of subject terms and free words. Data were extracted from studies that met the inclusion criteria and meta-analyzed using Stata 17.0 software to compare the efficacy and treatment-related adverse toxicities of chemotherapy/chemoimmunotherapy plus radiotherapy with chemotherapy/chemoimmunotherapy alone. Results: Finally, a total of 12 studies (11 retrospective cohort studies and 1 randomized controlled trial) involving 2,428 patients were included in the analysis, with squamous cell carcinoma accounting for 98.9%. In terms of efficacy, meta-analysis revealed the radiotherapy combined group (RT group) had significantly higher objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) than those of the non-radiotherapy combined group (NRT group). Stratified analysis showed that for patients with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-based systemic treatment and oligometastatic esophageal cancer, the OS and PFS of the RT group were significantly better than those of the NRT group (ICIs ± radiotherapy: Hazard ratio (HR)=0.61, 95%CI:0.48-0.76, P<0.001; HR = 0.60, 95%CI:0.49-0.73, P<0.001, oligometastatic esophageal cancer: HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.64-0.84, P<0.001; HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.58-0.76, p<0.001). The incidence of grade≥3 hematological toxicity and treatment-related pneumonia in the RT group was higher than that in the NRT group, and there was no significant difference in gastrointestinal adverse reactions between the two groups(2.5%-12.2% vs. 3.4%-13.2%, P = 0.828). Conclusions: Based on the current data, systemic therapy combined with local radiotherapy may be a better option for advanced esophageal cancer, but the potential risk of higher hematological toxicity and treatment-related pneumonia need to be weighed. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, PROSPERO identifier CRD420251101459.
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.