Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Three-Year Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy vs. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Three-Year Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy vs. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
Do you wish to request the book?
Three-Year Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy vs. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Three-Year Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy vs. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
2026
Overview
Background: Patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC) have poor prognosis after surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) may improve outcomes, but their long-term efficacy remains unclear. Methods: This multicenter study analyzed LA-ESCC patients from three Chinese hospitals (2015–2024) who received nCIT or nCRT followed by surgery. Primary endpoint was 3-year overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), pathologic complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS), and adverse events. Propensity score matching balanced baseline characteristics. Results: Among 225 patients (87 nCRT, 138 nCIT), matched cohorts (87 per group) showed that nCRT had higher ORR (85.06% vs. 45.98%), T/N downstaging rates (78.16% vs. 58.62%; 85.06% vs. 45.98%), and pCR (37.90% vs. 14.90%) (all p < 0.01). After median follow-up (nCIT: 44.5 months; nCRT: 35.1 months), nCIT improved 3-year OS (75.90% vs. 55.60%) and DFS (66.40% vs. 47.30%) (p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis favored nCRT in N+ or non-cT4 disease. Clinical N stage independently predicted survival. Conclusion: nCIT demonstrates superior survival benefits in LA-ESCC, while nCRT may be more effective for N+ or non-cT4 patients. Further randomized trials are warranted.
