ArticlePrecision radiation oncology2026
Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable cT3-4a esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A matched cohort analysis.
Article in Precision radiation 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal management of locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), particularly for cT3-4a disease, remains debated. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes and toxicity profiles of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ACRT) in this patient population. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 223 patients with resectable cT3-4a ESCC who underwent radical surgery combined with NCRT or ACRT. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to generate 59 balanced pairs for comparative analysis. Results: After matching, the NCRT group demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with the ACRT group, with a median OS of 62 versus 46 months and 5-year OS rates of 66.6% versus 47.5%, respectively ( Conclusions: For patients with resectable cT3-4a ESCC, NCRT provides superior OS compared to ACRT, with similar PFS and toxicity. These findings support the prioritization of NCRT for this disease stage; however, larger randomized trials are warranted to optimize patient selection.
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.