scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Esophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy as initial treatment for clinical stage I esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this article, the authors compared the efficacy and safety of esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy as the initial treatment for clinical stage I esophageal cancer (EC).
Abstract
BACKGROUND Esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy are commonly used in the treatment of stage I esophageal cancer (EC). The present study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy as the initial treatment for clinical stage I EC. METHODS This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020197203). Relevant studies were identified through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from database inception to June 30, 2020. Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was employed to compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI was employed to compare treatment-related death, complications, and tumor recurrence. RESULTS A total of 13 non-randomized controlled studies involving 3,346 patients were included. Compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy, esophagectomy showed an improved OS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55-0.86; P < 0.001), PFS (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.67; P < 0.001), and a lower risk of tumor recurrence (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.75-1.65; P = 0.60) and treatment-related death (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.31-4.30; P = 0.84) between the two treatments. CONCLUSIONS Current evidence shows esophagectomy has superior survival benefits as the initial treatment for clinical stage I EC. It is still the preferred choice for patients with clinical stage I EC. However, future high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to validate this conclusion.

read more

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Journal ArticleDOI

Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries.

TL;DR: The GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as mentioned in this paper show that female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung cancer, colorectal (11 4.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%) and female breast (6.9%), and cervical cancer (5.6%) cancers.
Journal ArticleDOI

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

TL;DR: A reporting guideline is described, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015), which consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review.
Journal ArticleDOI

Perioperative Chemotherapy versus Surgery Alone for Resectable Gastroesophageal Cancer

TL;DR: In patients with operable gastric or lower esophageal adenocarcinomas, a perioperative regimen of ECF decreased tumor size and stage and significantly improved progression-free and overall survival.
Journal ArticleDOI

Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis

TL;DR: This practical guide should improve the quality of the analysis and subsequent interpretation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that include time-to-event outcomes and provide a corresponding, easy- to-use calculations spreadsheet, to facilitate the computational aspects.