ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Refining post-neoadjuvant risk stratification in ESCC with lymph node regression grade.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery is standard care for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), yet reliable post-NAC prognostic indicators remain limited. We evaluated the prognostic value of lymph node regression grade (LRG) in ESCC after NAC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 173 patients with ESCC who received NAC followed by resection at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital (2013-2018). Based on LRG, patients were categorized as lymph-node response (LN-R), lymph-node non-response (LN-NR), or lymph-node negative (LN-Neg). Kaplan-Meier analyses compared overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) among groups. Variables with P<0.05 in univariable Cox models, together with clinically relevant covariates, entered multivariable Cox regression. Nomograms for OS and DFS were developed from multivariable results; calibration curves were used to assess agreement between predicted and observed outcomes. Results: Five-year OS differed significantly across groups: 69.2% (LN-R), 57.4% (LN-Neg), and 24.6% (LN-NR) (P<0.001). DFS also varied significantly among the three groups (P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, LN-R status was independently associated with lower risks of death (hazard ratio=0.38) and recurrence, supporting LRG as a favorable prognostic factor. Poor differentiation (G2-G3) and advanced ypT stage (3-4) were adverse prognosticators. Nomograms incorporating LRG and pathological factors were constructed and calibrated. Conclusions: LRG provides independent prognostic information in ESCC after NAC, beyond primary-tumor response. Incorporating LRG into post-NAC risk stratification may refine prognostic assessment and help guide individualized management in the precision-medicine era.
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.