ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immunochemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity-matched analysis of response, survival, lymph node pattern, and immune microenvironment.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
Objective: To compare efficacy, survival and tumor immune microenvironment between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) and neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) to guide individualized treatment. Methods: A total of 346 locally advanced ESCC patients after 1:1 propensity score matching were retrospectively analyzed. Pathological, radiological and multiplex immunofluorescence assessments were performed, and survival outcomes were evaluated. Results: NCRT resulted in significantly greater tumor volume reduction (22.09 vs. 15.37 mm³), lower residual primary tumor ratio (14.10% vs. 32.23%), higher tumor downstaging and pathological complete response (pCR) rates (all p < 0.05). NCRT showed more prominent lymph node regression adjacent to the primary tumor than in peripheral nodes. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were comparable between groups. Among pCR patients, NICT achieved significantly better OS (p = 0.0051) and RFS (p = 0.018), while NCRT was associated with superior RFS in non-pCR patients (p = 0.0099). In the NICT group, high PD-L1 expression and low tumor burden tended to correlate with pCR. Immune microenvironment analysis revealed fewer immunosuppressive T cells and immune-evasive tumor cells in the NICT group. Conclusion: NCRT presents superior local tumor regression, while NICT benefits pCR patients by optimizing the immune microenvironment. High PD-L1 expression and low tumor burden favor NICT. These findings support individualized neoadjuvant strategy selection for ESCC.
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.