ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2026
Inter-institutional heterogeneity in high-volume esophageal cancer centers: an ancillary study of JCOG1109 (JCOG2308A).
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultimodal esophageal cancer treatment carries substantial perioperative risks. Although centralization has improved outcomes, variability may persist even among high-volume centers. This study aimed to evaluate inter-institutional heterogeneity in perioperative and survival outcomes using data from JCOG1109.
methodsJCOG1109, a phase III multicenter trial, compared neoadjuvant cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (CF); docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF); and cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil combined with radiotherapy (CF-RT) for stage IB-III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Individual patient data and institutional survey results were analyzed. Mixed-effects models with random intercepts and slopes, incorporating institutions as random effects, were applied to quantify heterogeneity in DCF and CF-RT's treatment effects on postoperative complications, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), separated from baseline institutional risks in the CF arm.
resultsFrom 44 institutions, 580 patients were eligible and 546 underwent surgery. PFS treatment effect variance was smaller than baseline risk variability (CF: 0.062, standard deviation [SD]: 0.069; DCF: 0.044, SD: 0.053; CF-RT: 0.051, SD: 0.057), whereas OS variance exceeded baseline risk (CF: 0.058, SD: 0.068; DCF: 0.080, SD: 0.094; CF-RT: 0.072, SD: 0.079). Complication variance was lower in both experimental arms (CF: 0.342, SD: 0.432; DCF: 0.111, SD: 0.168; CF-RT: 0.190, SD: 0.326), although it was greater in the CF-RT arm than in the DCF arm.
conclusionsMultimodal treatment was delivered with high consistency across specialized centers, as reflected by minimal heterogeneity in PFS. In contrast, moderate heterogeneity in OS indicated institutional influences, particularly post-recurrence management, which should be considered in trial designs and clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42380720What 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.