ArticleBMC cancer2025
Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a clinical retrospective study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a network meta-analysis and real-world study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- A Prospective Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study of Neoadjuvant Sintilimab Plus Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Clinical Node-Positive Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Observational
- Review
- Perioperative outcomes following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs neoadjuvant therapies become increasingly crucial in the management of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), improving local control, R0 resection rates, and overall survival, determining the optimal neoadjuvant strategy remains a priority. This study retrospectively assesses the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT), chemoradiotherapy (NCRT), and chemotherapy (NCT) in operable ESCC.
methodsAnalyzing preoperative clinical data from resectable ESCC patients treated with NICT, NCRT, or NCT at Shandong Cancer Hospital from January 2018 to August 2022, we focused on surgical complications, pathological responses, and survival outcomes.
resultsData from 300 patients (91 NICT, 113 NCRT, 96 NCT) were evaluated. The NICT group showed a lower incidence of surgical complications compared to NCRT (17.6% vs. 36.3%, p = 0.003) and was on par with NCT (17.6% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.365). NICT had less favorable complete pathological response rates than NCRT (p < 0.001) but outperformed NCT. Notably, the NICT cohort achieved superior 2-year recurrence-free (81.3%) and overall survival (93.4%) compared to NCRT (73.5% and 84.1%, p = 0.187 and p = 0.043) and NCT (44.8% and 61.5%, p < 0.001 for both).
conclusionDespite a slightly lower rate of pathological remission, NICT significantly reduced surgical complications and improved survival outcomes. It presents a compelling option in the neoadjuvant treatment of resectable ESCC, with the potential to supersede NCRT and NCT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.