ライフサイエンスコーパス: esophageal cancer

1 ases, and colorectal, renal, pancreatic, and esophageal cancers).

2 or predictive biomarkers in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

3 all patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

4 ive with open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer.

5 d outcomes of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.

6 have no impact on survival and recurrence in esophageal cancer.

7 sive surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

8 ificant survival benefit for clinical T3N0M0 esophageal cancer.

9 -positive and, in particular, EGFR-amplified esophageal cancer.

10 en shown to contribute to the progression of esophageal cancer.

11 d short- and long-term oncologic outcomes in esophageal cancer.

12 eferred management approach for locoregional esophageal cancer.

13 ted with chronic gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal cancer.

14 strategy in improving survival of resectable esophageal cancer.

15 thCR after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer.

16 or detecting residual disease after nCRT for esophageal cancer.

17 assess its prognostic value in patients with esophageal cancer.

18 terms of short- and long-term mortality for esophageal cancer.

19 basis for individualized therapy of advanced esophageal cancer.

20 procedure with rates of pCR in patients with esophageal cancer.

21 on-response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer.

22 tly increased odds of a pCR in patients with esophageal cancer.

23 future edition of the TNM staging system for esophageal cancer.

24 elp reverse the increase in the incidence of esophageal cancer.

25 orbidity in surgically treated patients with esophageal cancer.

26 for Barrett's esophagus (BE), a precursor to esophageal cancer.

27 ntial therapy for several cancers, including esophageal cancer.

28 2 high volume centers for the management of esophageal cancer.

29 rsely associated with histologic subtypes of esophageal cancer.

30 carcinoma (ESCC), and 23 were other types of esophageal cancer.

31 nd surgery in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.

32 ly the standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer.

33 of modern targeted therapeutic regimens for esophageal cancer.

34 profiling as a new screening test in gastro-esophageal cancer.

35 tor and epidermal growth factor receptor, in esophageal cancer.

36 in identifying those at high risk of gastro-esophageal cancer.

37 n technique as a treatment for patients with esophageal cancer.

38 ratify after chemoradiotherapy for localized esophageal cancer.

39 ter neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal cancer.

40 eatment regime in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer.

41 component of the management of patients with esophageal cancer.

42 age esophagectomy (SALV) in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

43 e (AFF), osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), and esophageal cancer.

44 chemoradiotherapy as a primary treatment for esophageal cancer.

45 ns compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for esophageal cancer.

46 and OE influences the long-term survival in esophageal cancer.

47 ide trends in treatment and outcomes of T1N0 esophageal cancer.

48 patients who undergo open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

49 reasing application in surgical treatment of esophageal cancer.

50 ommended as a standard surgical approach for esophageal cancer.

51 There was 1 study each on liver and esophageal cancer.

52 d in healthy volunteers and in patients with esophageal cancers.

53 limeter +/- 0.11 P < .001) of rat orthotopic esophageal cancers.

54 OD2) is frequently overexpressed in oral and esophageal cancers.

55 nitiation and progression of tobacco-induced esophageal cancers.

56 ul distinction between the two histotypes of esophageal cancers.

57 as a novel biomarker for targeted therapy in esophageal cancers.

58 mph node metastases in surgically resectable esophageal cancers.

59 P < .001) of rat orthotopic esophageal cancers.

60 ned (10-y HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.11), and esophageal cancer (10-y HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.26).

61 irin users vs non-users after diagnosis with esophageal cancer (48% vs 50% in England and 49% vs 46%

62 Among 3592 patients with esophageal cancer (84.7% adenocarcinoma, 15.2% squamous

63 ed (18)F-FDG PET/CT for diagnosing recurrent esophageal cancer after initial treatment with curative

64 -see approach in a subgroup of patients with esophageal cancer after nCRT.

65 ased 5-year mortality of potentially curable esophageal cancer after surgery later in the week sugges

66 moderate specificity for detecting recurrent esophageal cancer after treatment with curative intent.

67 rt, 5 case-control) reporting 1,871 cases of esophageal cancer among 1,381,844 patients.

68 The annual mortality rate from esophageal cancer among patients with BE was 0.14%; 4.5%

69 ure, 8.18 vertebral fracture, 1.14 AFF, 0.21 esophageal cancer and 0.09 ONJ events per 1,000 person-y

70 cottish cohorts contained 4654 patients with esophageal cancer and 3833 patients with gastric cancer,

71 Active surveillance for patients with esophageal cancer and a clinically complete response (cC

72 his study compared outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer and clinically complete response (cCR)

73 idered useful as a new staging parameter for esophageal cancer and could also be of interest for othe

74 t human evidence of their role is scarce for esophageal cancer and inconsistent for gastric cancer.

75 f cancer progression, but the innervation of esophageal cancer and its clinicopathologic significance

76 inoma led to contributions in the staging of esophageal cancer and its treatment with an en bloc rese

77 erine, and cervical cancer and lower odds of esophageal cancer and melanoma but not associated with 1

78 r pancreatic, kidney, uterine, cervical, and esophageal cancer and melanoma, respectively.

79 ved that CTECs were present in patients with esophageal cancer and non-small cell lung cancer (N = 40

80 y options for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer and provide recommended care options f

81 his study, we investigated CA9 expression in esophageal cancers and in precancerous lesions and explo

82 (perineural invasion) was detected in 12% of esophageal cancers and was associated with reduced survi

83 Nerves were detected in 38% of esophageal cancers and were more associated with squamou

84 ure using the key words "(18)F-FDG PET" and "esophageal cancer" and synonyms.

85 were defined as individuals who had died of esophageal cancer, and controls were residents from the

86 The risks of GI cancers combined, esophageal cancer, and gastric cancer were lower when bi

87 survival for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, and to evaluate how pathologic diseas

88 ncer, stomach cancer, pancreatic cancer, and esophageal cancer are leading causes of cancer-related d

89 rimary outcome was the presence of recurrent esophageal cancer as determined by histopathologic biops

90 harynx/larynx cancers) and 300 patients with esophageal cancers as well as 1,599 comparable controls

91 ients before and after chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer, as well as DNA from leukocytes and fi

92 tractive alternative for management of early esophageal cancer, avoiding the morbidity of esophagecto

93 1 y; 113 men, 17 women) with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer before definitive radiochemotherapy.

94 Patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between 1987 and 2010 with follow-up u

95 of 1,615 patients who underwent surgery for esophageal cancer between 1987 and 2010 with follow-up u

96 From a database of 2944 operated on for esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2010, 209 patients wh

97 patients treated with nCRT plus surgery for esophageal cancer between 2001 and 2011.

98 cic or transhiatal esophagectomy for primary esophageal cancer between 2011-2015 were included.

99 pathCR to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer beyond clinical predictors.

100 After nCRT for esophageal cancer, both the mucosa and the submucosa sho

101 potentially curative treatment for localized esophageal cancer, but is a complex operation.

102 as become an accepted option for early-stage esophageal cancer, but nationwide utilization rates and

103 1 years (1992-2010), there were 341 incident esophageal cancer cases, of which 142 were esophageal ad

104 A panel of gastric and esophageal cancer cell lines was treated with wortmannin

105 promote apoptosis and limit proliferation of esophageal cancer cell lines.

106 platin and 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin to esophageal cancer cells (OE33) in vitro is observed.

107 ng protein (RBP) CUG-BP1 is overexpressed in esophageal cancer cells and post-transcriptionally regul

108 analogues were cytotoxic toward gastric and esophageal cancer cells and showed lower IC50 values tha

109 SC properties in nontransformed cells and in esophageal cancer cells by direct upregulation of SOX9.

110 regulation contributes to chemoresistance in esophageal cancer cells by targeting both survivin and C

111 Forced expression of miR-214-3p in esophageal cancer cells leads to a decrease in the mRNA

112 that zinc may inhibit cell proliferation of esophageal cancer cells through Orai1-mediated intracell

113 on of miR-214-3p enhances the sensitivity of esophageal cancer cells to cisplatin-induced apoptosis.

114 The neurotrophic activity of esophageal cancer cells was inhibited by anti-NGF blocki

115 In vitro, NGF production in esophageal cancer cells was shown by Western blot, and e

116 cancer cells was shown by Western blot, and esophageal cancer cells were able to induce neurite outg

117 Furthermore, treatment of esophageal cancer cells with the Akt inhibitor wortmanni

118 (miRs) in regulating survivin expression in esophageal cancer cells.

119 ulcer (PPU) was analyzed, independent of HV esophageal cancer center status and patient and disease-

120 e study was performed in 4 high-volume Dutch esophageal cancer centers between November 2009 and Apri

121 Operable patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer (clinically staged T3 N0-1 M0) were en

122 and esophagogastric junction using Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration data.

123 enter database for the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer collected data from 30 university hosp

124 Tumor entities comprised esophageal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer and pancr

125 From our comprehensive esophageal cancer database consisting of 510 patients, w

126 enrollment to the date of first diagnosis of esophageal cancer, date of death from other causes, or d

127 ethnic disparities in the incidence of total esophageal cancer decreased over time, which was due mai

128 Only a minority of esophageal cancers demonstrates a pathologic tumor respo

129 patients who underwent chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer, detection of ctDNA was associated wit

130 Esophageal cancers develop systems to evade anti-tumor i

131 al responses were observed in a patient with esophageal cancer (duration, 4 months), a patient with u

132 ents who underwent esophagectomy for primary esophageal cancer during the 4 years before (group A; 32

133 was found between any flavonoid subclass and esophageal cancer, EAC, or ESCC.

134 er of LNs invaded (NLNi) on the prognosis of esophageal cancer (EC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiothera

135 C to detect EpCAM expression in 170 cases of esophageal cancer (EC) and precancerous lesions, as well

136 ct on the esophageal toxicity prediction for esophageal cancer (EC) patients administered intensity-m

137 e to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in esophageal cancer (EC) patients is important in a more p

138 hough often investigated in locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC), the impact of neoadjuvant chemor

139 toperative mortality (POM) after surgery for esophageal cancer (EC).

140 culating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

141 or cells (CTCs) in 1 cohort of patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

142 In esophageal cancer, environmental exposures can trigger c

143 iation between physical activity and risk of esophageal cancer (esophageal adenocarcinoma [EAC] and/o

144 ct as chemopreventive agents for stomach and esophageal cancers, especially in high-risk populations.

145 nCRT according to the Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer Followed by Surgery Study-regimen can

146 al Practice Research Database diagnosed with esophageal cancer from 2000 through 2009.

147 ients undergoing curative-intent surgery for esophageal cancer from 2011 to 2017 in 3 high-volume cen

148 d women in the United Kingdom diagnosed with esophageal cancer from January 2000 through November 200

149 wed for consecutively enrolled patients with esophageal cancer from January 2000 to July 2015 present

150 who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from March 2010 to March 2016.

151 The epidemiologic shift in esophageal cancer from squamous cell carcinoma to esopha

152 The role of adjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer has been underestimated in the literat

153 Local excision for cT1N0 esophageal cancer has increased over time.

154 Use of endoscopic therapy for T1 esophageal cancer has increased significantly: for T1a,

155 In China, esophageal cancer has remained a large burden, and endos

156 f the molecular underpinnings of gastric and esophageal cancers has been accompanied with the develop

157 t response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer have no prognostic benefits, but exper

158 l and ethnic disparities in the incidence of esophageal cancer have not been thoroughly characterized

159 Improved oncologic outcomes for esophageal cancer have resulted in increased survivorshi

160 1.51, 95% CI 1.23-1.84) but similar risk for esophageal cancer (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53-1.70), and ONJ (

161 kerosene was associated with higher risk of esophageal cancer (HR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.10).

162 patients diagnosed with potentially curable esophageal cancer impacts overall survival.

163 While neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer improves oncologic outcomes for a broa

164 tive adult patients undergoing resection for esophageal cancer in 30 European centers from 2000 to 20

165 Data from patients operated on for esophageal cancer in 30 European centers were collected.

166 anuary 2003 and July 2011, all patients with esophageal cancer in a tertiary referral center, who und

167 Esophageal cancer in females should be considered a uniq

168 which was launched in a high-risk region for esophageal cancer in Iran.

169 RNA that may explain the higher incidence of esophageal cancer in male smokers.

170 on 1679 patients who underwent resection for esophageal cancer in Sweden in 1987 to 2010, with follow

171 omy for patients with T1-3N1M0 mid or distal esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base from

172 al xenografts, and nude rats with orthotopic esophageal cancers in four study groups of six animals p

173 Esophageal cancer incidence is increasing and has few tr

174 gh-volume centers, 468 patients with cT3NXM0 esophageal cancer, including 242 (51.7%) squamous cell c

175 d by immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 260 esophageal cancers, including 40 matched lymph node meta

176 Esophageal cancer is a deadly disease, ranking sixth amo

177 Esophageal cancer is a male predominant disease, and sex

178 The annual risk of esophageal cancer is approximately 0.25% for patients wi

179 ated whether statin use after a diagnosis of esophageal cancer is associated with reduced esophageal

180 Esophageal cancer is characterized by early and frequent

181 f an extended lymphadenectomy after nCRT for esophageal cancer is debated.

182 ile currently available clinical staging for esophageal cancer is lacking necessary accuracy.

183 Standard treatment for potentially curable esophageal cancer is nCRT plus surgery after 4 to 6 week

184 tandard curative treatment for patients with esophageal cancer is perioperative chemotherapy or preop

185 y, early diagnosis and curative treatment of esophageal cancer is possible.

186 extent of lymphadenectomy during surgery for esophageal cancer is uncertain and requires clarificatio

187 D DATA: The optimal treatment for resectable esophageal cancer is unknown.

188 and esophageal cancer syndrome, tylosis with esophageal cancer, is linked to mutations in RHBDF2 enco

189 achieves DC(50) values of 6.0 and 2.6 nM in esophageal cancer KYSE520 and acute myeloid leukemia MV4

190 he multimodal management of locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC), and to assess its independent

191 athologic response (pCR) in locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC).

192 ollected data from consecutive patients with esophageal cancer localized in the distal esophagus or g

193 me area (three per case) who had not died of esophageal cancer, matched by gender and birth year.

194 extent of lymphadenectomy during surgery for esophageal cancer might not influence 5-year all-cause o

195 The reduction in risk of esophageal cancer mortality in individuals who had ever

196 The results suggest a 47% reduction in esophageal cancer mortality risk due to endoscopic scree

197 d endoscopic screening is expected to reduce esophageal cancer mortality.

198 eous melanoma (n = 4), breast cancer (n =2), esophageal cancer (n =1), and lung cancer (n = 1).

199 ed from three groups of patients with gastro-esophageal cancer, noncancer diseases of the upper gastr

200 he circumferential resection margin (CRM) in esophageal cancer on survival and recurrence in patients

201 treatment at high-volume centers may improve esophageal cancer outcomes.

202 Esophageal cancer patients [n = 14; mean +/- SD age: 64.

203 Esophagectomies for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer patients diagnosed between 2007 and 20

204 Articles with esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy with

205 ation-based cohort study included 98% of all esophageal cancer patients who underwent elective surger

206 roved by the institutional review board, 228 esophageal cancer patients who underwent FDG PET/CT befo

207 Esophageal cancer patients with pathological complete re

208 uggest AC may provide additional benefit for esophageal cancer patients, and merits further investiga

209 adjuvant treatment upon survival for cT3N0M0 esophageal cancer patients, with subgroup analyses by hi

210 MIE negatively affect long-term survival of esophageal cancer patients.

211 fter neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in esophageal cancer patients.

212 In patients with esophageal cancer, pCR is associated with increased surv

213 s to centers that treated 2.6 (IQR: 1.9-3.3) esophageal cancers per year, and 317 Travel patients who

214 ancer-specific mortality among patients with esophageal cancer (pooled adjusted HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.8

215 cancer-specific mortality after diagnosis of esophageal cancer (pooled adjusted HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.8

216 mphadenectomy during esophagectomy alone for esophageal cancer provides accurate staging and maximum

217 used to identify patients with nonmetastatic esophageal cancer receiving either DCR (n = 5977) or neo

218 Preoperative CRT in patients with esophageal cancer reduced LRR and peritoneal carcinomato

219 Esophageal cancer-related gene 2 (ECRG2) is a newer tumo

220 the nonoperative treatment of patients with esophageal cancer remains uncertain.

221 nderstanding of the molecular composition of esophageal cancer requires attention to not only tumor c

222 Higher surgeon volume of esophageal cancer resection decreased the risk of spleni

223 avonoid intake was inversely associated with esophageal cancer risk (hazard ratio (HR) (log(2)) = 0.8

224 ion between the rs13181 variant G allele and esophageal cancer risk (TG/GG vs. TT, OR = 1.17; 95% CI

225 al and/or occupational physical activity and esophageal cancer risk.

226 which may have significant implications for esophageal cancer screening in China, especially in rura

227 Since nearly one-third of patients with esophageal cancer show pathologically complete response

228 mouse xenograft models of human ovarian and esophageal cancer (SKOV-3 and OE19), we evaluated antibo

229 cell carcinoma, was associated with reduced esophageal cancer-specific and all-cause mortality.

230 esophageal cancer is associated with reduced esophageal cancer-specific and all-cause mortality.

231 ation between statin use after diagnosis and esophageal cancer-specific and all-cause mortality.

232 osis was associated with a decreased risk of esophageal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ra

233 osis was associated with a decreased risk of esophageal cancer-specific mortality (HR, 0.61; 95% CI 0

234 All patients with esophageal cancer staged before NAC with PET/CT and afte

235 al advances in diagnostics and therapeutics, esophageal cancer still carries a poor prognosis, and th

236 ited Kingdom's BE gene study and stomach and esophageal cancer study.

237 ifferent stages of tumor progression in each esophageal cancer subtype will lead to development of no

238 hologic response to neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer such as Mandard tumor regression gradi

239 amous esophageal epithelium of patients with esophageal cancer suggesting a potential role of these r

240 To study the influence of esophageal cancer surgeon volume upon mortality from upp

241 The complex elective workload of HV esophageal cancer surgeons appears to lower the threshol

242 Some 616 patients undergoing open esophageal cancer surgery between April 2, 2001 and Dece

243 Esophageal cancer surgery carries a risk of splenic inju

244 ohort study enrolled 616 patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery during 2001 to 2005, with 10 y

245 anastomosis and/or thoracotomy on POM after esophageal cancer surgery in recent years.

246 Esophageal cancer surgery is an exemplar of major operat

247 All consecutive patients who underwent esophageal cancer surgery with reconstruction between 20

248 kg m, and dyslipidemia in 10.2%), underwent esophageal cancer surgery, 85% having an open thoracotom

249 Pneumonia is commonly documented following esophageal cancer surgery, and reducing its incidence is

250 ients from 20 European Centers who underwent esophageal cancer surgery, and were disease-free at leas

251 r in 2000-2012 at a high-volume hospital for esophageal cancer surgery, with follow-up until 2014.

252 iderably impaired HRQOL up to 10 years after esophageal cancer surgery.

253 e relationships led to the centralization of esophageal cancer surgery.

254 ational training and mentorship programs for esophageal cancer surgery.

255 AKI is common but mostly self-limiting after esophageal cancer surgery.

256 nd splenic injury supports centralization of esophageal cancer surgery.

257 The palmoplantar keratinization and esophageal cancer syndrome, tylosis with esophageal canc

258 oline 1-oxide (4-NQO)-induced mouse model of esophageal cancer that recapitulates the EPHB4 expressio

259 ata suggest that innervation is a feature in esophageal cancers that may be driven by cancer cell-rel

260 bjects who used statins after a diagnosis of esophageal cancer, the median survival time was 14.9 mon

261 the herb Ilex Paraguarensis] contributes to esophageal cancer), there are not much data to support o

262 With improved oncologic outcomes in esophageal cancer, there is an increasing focus on funct

263 g 112 patients with resectable intrathoracic esophageal cancer to either RAMIE or OTE.

264 Retrospective cohort study of patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiatio

265 Patients with esophageal cancer, treated with nCRT plus surgery were i

266 ode yield improves survival in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy with or witho

267 We hypothesized that patients with cT1N0 esophageal cancer undergoing local excision would have l

268 m survival in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant CRT followed by

269 c dilatation in patients with lower thoracic esophageal cancer undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy.

270 omy (MIE) versus open esophagectomy (OE) for esophageal cancer using a nationwide propensity-score ma

271 the relevance of SMARCA4 as a drug target in esophageal cancer using an engineered ESCC cell model ha

272 ysplasia (squamous and Barrett's), and early esophageal cancer using resection and ablation technolog

273 have been hypothesized to affect the risk of esophageal cancer via different mechanisms, but the inta

274 Meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk of esophageal cancer was 29% lower among the most physicall

275 PFS for patients with esophageal cancer was associated with MTV and with IMH.K

276 n symptomatic patients in whom recurrence of esophageal cancer was suspected, were deemed eligible fo

277 mice (L2-cre;p120ctn(f/f)), a model of oral-esophageal cancer, we have identified CD38 as playing a

278 F-FDG PET and PET/CT in diagnosing recurrent esophageal cancer were 96% (95% confidence interval, 93%

279 total of 12,383 patients with clinical T1N0 esophageal cancer were analyzed.

280 Esophagectomies in 1,821 patients with esophageal cancer were conducted by 139 surgeons.

281 s with biopsy-proven high-grade dysplasia or esophageal cancer were enrolled at 17 credentialed sites

282 However, 15% of patients with cT1b esophageal cancer were found to have positive nodal dise

283 T1N0 esophageal cancers were identified in the National Cance

284 Preventive effects for stomach and esophageal cancers were often limited to or stronger in

285 patients with gastric, gastroesophageal, or esophageal cancer who are administered the nanoparticle

286 ogic lymph node involvement in patients with esophageal cancer who are clinically node negative using

287 elative to placebo in patients with advanced esophageal cancer who had disease progression after chem

288 ears to identify a subgroup of patients with esophageal cancer who may benefit from gefitinib as a se

289 meta-analysis, comprising 486 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent (18)F-FDG PET or PET/CT

290 on-based cohort study of 1,335 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophageal resection in

291 ve review of 1958 patients (21% female) with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at a singl

292 teristics and outcomes of 1958 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy demonstrat

293 (1998-2012) for patients with clinical T1N0 esophageal cancer who underwent local excision (n = 1625

294 Patients with esophageal cancer with positive lymph nodes benefit from

295 ll carcinoma is a major histological type of esophageal cancer, with distinct incidence and survival

296 with irregular Z line do not develop HGD or esophageal cancer within 5 years after index endoscopy.

297 hCR) to chemoradiotherapy before surgery for esophageal cancer would enable investigators to study th

298 ution studies in mice with breast, lung, and esophageal cancer xenografts consistently showed enhance

299 millimeter +/- 0.15, P < .001) of mice with esophageal cancer xenografts, as well as the smallest re

300 millimeter +/- 0.15, P < .001) of mice with esophageal cancer xenografts, as well as the smallest re