[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-410084-105":59,"doc-detail-410084-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":127,"head_meta":129,"extra_data":131,"updated_unix":133},105,"en","comparison-of-the-efficacy-of-different-treatments-after-non-curative-endoscopic-resection-of-superficial-esophageal-carcinoma-a-meta-analysis","Comparison of the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma - A meta-analysis","","Systematically evaluating the efficacy of multiple post-non-curative strategies after endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma, this meta-analysis compares adjuvant treatment options. Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were searched through November 25, 2025, and quantitative synthesis used Review Manager 5.3 with Stata 15 for supplementary analyses. Thirteen studies with 1,304 patients were included, with recurrence outcomes and risk factors assessed to guide selection of follow-up management.",{"@graph":69,"@context":126},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparison-of-the-efficacy-of-different-treatments-after-non-curative-endoscopic-resection-of-superficial-esophageal-carcinoma-a-meta-analysis/410084/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparison-of-the-efficacy-of-different-treatments-after-non-curative-endoscopic-resection-of-superficial-esophageal-carcinoma-a-meta-analysis/410084.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Genevieve","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-29","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":14},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118,122],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What is the main objective of this study?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To systematically evaluate the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Which databases and statistical tools were used in the meta-analysis?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were searched to November 25, 2025. Review Manager 5.3 was used for the meta-analysis, with Stata version 15 for supplementary statistical assessments.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How did recurrence rates compare between observation and adjuvant treatment groups?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Recurrence rate was significantly higher in the observation group than in the adjuvant treatment group (OR = 3.25, 95% CI: 1.88–5.62, P \u003C 0.0001).",{"name":123,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":124},"What conclusion was drawn about lymphovascular invasion and recurrence risk?",{"text":125,"@type":113},"Lymphovascular invasion was identified as a risk factor for recurrence, with a statistically significant higher recurrence rate (OR = 4.01, 95% CI: 1.48–10.84, P = 0.006).","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":128,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":130,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":132,"site_id":62},410084,1790673706,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":135},{"doc_id":132,"user_id":136,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":14,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":52,"language":143,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":147,"read_time":148},1374391974585,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","TYPE Systematic Review PUBLISHED 18 December 2025 DOI 10.3389/fonc.2025.1709350  \nOPEN ACCESS  \nEDITED BY  \nMingzhou Guo,  \nPeople’s Liberation Army General Hospital, China  \nREVIEWED BY  \nYan Wang,  \nSichuan University, China Lorenzo Giorgi,  \nHumanitas Research Hospital, Italy  \n*CORRESPONDENCE  \nShu-Ni Tian  \n [plj8353@163.com](plj8353@163.com)  \nRECEIVED 20 September 2025  \nREVISED 27 November 2025  \nACCEPTED 27 November 2025  \nPUBLISHED 18 December 2025  \nCITATION  \nWang R, Peng L-J and Tian S-N (2025) Comparison of the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis.  \nFront. Oncol. 15:1709350 .  \ndoi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1709350  \nCOPYRIGHT  \n© 2025 Wang, Peng and Tian. This is an openaccess article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.  \nComparison of the efficacy of different treatments after noncurative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis  \nRui Wang 1, Li-Jun Peng 2,3 and Shu-Ni Tian 3*  \n1School of Clinical Medicine, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, Shandong, China,  \n2 Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Hospital of Peking University People’s Hospital, Qingdao, Shandong, China, 3 Department of Gastroenterology, Linyi People’s Hospital, Linyi, Shandong, China  \nObjective: This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection for superficial esophageal carcinoma.  \nMethods: Databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data were searched from inception to November 25, 2025 . The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3, with Stata version 15 employed for supplementary statistical assessments.  \nResults: A total of 13 studies involving 1,304 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the recurrence rate after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma was significantly higher in the observation group than in the adjuvant treatment group (OR = 3. 25, 95% CI: 1 .88–5. 62, P \u003C 0 . 0001) . However, there was no significant difference in recurrence rate between the chemoradiotherapy group and the surgery group (OR = 0 . 65, 95% CI: 0 .23–1. 84, P = 0 . 42) . Patients with lymphovascular invasion had a higher recurrence rate, which was statistically significant (OR = 4 . 01, 95% CI: 1 .48–10. 84, P = 0 . 006) .  \nConclusion: Lymphovascular invasion is a risk factor for recurrence in patients. The adjuvant treatment group shows significantly reduced recurrence rates compared to the observation group, with no significant difference in recurrence rates between surgical and chemoradiotherapeutic approaches.  \nSystematic review registration: [https://www. crd.york. ac.uk/prospero/](https://www. crd.york. ac.uk/prospero/) , identifier CRD420251108299 .  \nKEYWORDS  \nesophageal carcinoma, meta-analysis, non-curative endosco pic resection, radiotherapy, surgery  \nFrontiers in Oncology 01 [frontiersin.org](frontiersin.org)  \n1 Introduction  \nEsophageal cancer is one of the most common malignancies, ranking 11th in global incidence and seventh in mortality worldwide (1), and it is the fifth leading cause of cancer mortality in China (2), according to the Global Cancer Statistics 2022 .  \nSuperficial esophageal carcinoma is defined as carcinoma confined to the mucosa (T1a) or submucosa (T1b), irrespective of lymph node or distant metastasis. Based on the depth of invasion, mucosal esophageal cancer may be limited to the epithelium (M1), lamina ","cbCaieSqtbmKnWGu","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaieSqtbmKnWGu","pdf",1362231,"English","# Introduction\n## Background and definitions\n# Methods\n## Literature search and analysis\n# Results\n## Study inclusion and recurrence outcomes\n# Conclusion\n## Clinical implications","[{\"question\":\"What is the main objective of this study?\",\"answer\":\"To systematically evaluate the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma.\"},{\"question\":\"Which databases and statistical tools were used in the meta-analysis?\",\"answer\":\"PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were searched to November 25, 2025. Review Manager 5.3 was used for the meta-analysis, with Stata version 15 for supplementary statistical assessments.\"},{\"question\":\"How did recurrence rates compare between observation and adjuvant treatment groups?\",\"answer\":\"Recurrence rate was significantly higher in the observation group than in the adjuvant treatment group (OR = 3.25, 95% CI: 1.88–5.62, P \\u003c 0.0001).\"},{\"question\":\"What conclusion was drawn about lymphovascular invasion and recurrence risk?\",\"answer\":\"Lymphovascular invasion was identified as a risk factor for recurrence, with a statistically significant higher recurrence rate (OR = 4.01, 95% CI: 1.48–10.84, P = 0.006).\"}]","Comparison of the efficacy of different treatments after non-curative endoscopic resection of superficial esophageal carcinoma - A meta-analysis | PDF",1790584229,25]