ArticleJAMA network open2026
Prior Cancer and Survival in Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in JAMA network open, 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is highly prevalent in Asian populations and carries a poor prognosis. With growing numbers of cancer survivors, the prognostic impact of prior cancer in ESCC remains unclear. Most existing data are derived from Western cohorts dominated by adenocarcinoma, limiting generalizability to Asian populations. Objective: To evaluate whether prior cancer is associated with overall survival (OS) and esophageal cancer-specific mortality (ECSM) in a nationwide Korean ESCC cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed ESCC across 19 tertiary hospitals in Korea from 2005 to 2017 was conducted. Follow-up was completed in 2017. Data were reanalyzed in August 2025. Exclusion criteria were nonsquamous histology (including adenocarcinoma), diagnosis of esophageal cancer within 6 months of a prior cancer, multiple prior cancers, and hematologic cancers. Exposures: History of cancer before the diagnosis of ESCC, classified by cancer type and latency (≤5 years vs >5 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was OS, and the secondary outcome was esophageal cancer-specific mortality (ECSM). Hazard ratios (HRs) and cause-specific hazard ratios (CSHRs) were estimated after adjustment for clinicopathologic and treatment variables. Propensity score-adjusted Cox regression and competing risk regression models were used. Subgroup analyses were conducted by prior cancer type and latency period. Results: Of the 5557 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.7 [8.9] years; 5168 [93.0%] male), 368 (6.6%) had a prior cancer and were older and more often diagnosed at an earlier stage than those without prior cancer. Patients with a prior cancer had significantly poorer outcomes, with a median OS of 3.58 (95% CI, 2.50-4.92) vs 4.25 (95% CI, 3.83-4.58) years and a 3-year ECSM of 8.35% (95% CI, 4.42%-12.29%) vs 4.98% (95% CI, 4.17%-5.78%) compared with those without a prior cancer. Prior cancer was independently associated with worse OS (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.47) and ECSM (CSHR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.09-3.29). Among prior cancer types, patients with a history of stomach, head and neck, or lung cancer demonstrated poorer OS (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.24-2.15; P < .001). A latency of 5 or more years was also associated with reduced OS (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.03-1.57; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide Korean cohort study, prior cancer was an independent adverse prognostic factor in ESCC, with stomach, head and neck, and lung cancers associated with the poorest outcomes.
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.