ライフサイエンスコーパス: esophageal cancer

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

2 basis for individualized therapy of advanced esophageal cancer.

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

4 on-response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in esophageal cancer.

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

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

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

8 or predictive biomarkers in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

9 orbidity in surgically treated patients with esophageal cancer.

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

11 ntial therapy for several cancers, including esophageal cancer.

12 all patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

13 rsely associated with histologic subtypes of esophageal cancer.

14 ive with open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer.

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

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

17 of modern targeted therapeutic regimens for esophageal cancer.

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

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

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

21 regulated by the MAPK pathway in gastric and esophageal cancer.

22 cause, nearly 4-fold the number that died of esophageal cancer.

23 non-Hodgkin lymphoma, head/neck, ovarian, or esophageal cancer.

24 timal surgical approach in the management of esophageal cancer.

25 d outcomes of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.

26 evention, while vitamin C lowers the risk of esophageal cancer.

27 tic stratification in the primary staging of esophageal cancer.

28 heir universal use in the treatment of early esophageal cancer.

29 ecursor lesions, and a high lifetime risk of esophageal cancer.

30 ity for treatment of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal cancer.

31 for the treatment of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal cancer.

32 ration is the worst prognostic factor in pT1 esophageal cancer.

33 ing to the depth of wall infiltration in pT1 esophageal cancer.

34 reatment option for patients with resectable esophageal cancer.

35 elatively safe in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer.

36 n Americans and precedes almost all cases of esophageal cancer.

37 tocellular cancer, and fumonisin may promote esophageal cancer.

38 ective trial of FDG-PET-directed therapy for esophageal cancer.

39 pediatric patients may be severe and include esophageal cancer.

40 y in patients undergoing radical surgery for esophageal cancer.

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

42 sive surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

43 ificant survival benefit for clinical T3N0M0 esophageal cancer.

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

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

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

47 eferred management approach for locoregional esophageal cancer.

48 assess its prognostic value in patients with esophageal cancer.

49 ted with chronic gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal cancer.

50 strategy in improving survival of resectable esophageal cancer.

51 thCR after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer.

52 assess its prognostic value in patients with esophageal cancer.

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

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 s found primarily for colorectal and stomach/esophageal cancers.

59 ancer accounts for more than 90% of cases of esophageal cancers.

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

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

62 r transhiatal esophagectomy (n = 10) for pT1 esophageal cancer [121 adenocarcinomas (AC), 50 squamous

63 rwent, (1) CRT for local-regionally advanced esophageal cancer, (2) post-CRT endoscopic biopsy, and (

64 ndrome, and nephrosis; 4.08 (1.38-12.08) for esophageal cancer; 4.19 (1.18-14.94) for prostate cancer

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

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

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

68 Esophageal cancer after liver transplantation is rare, w

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

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

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

72 honate and control cohorts; the incidence of esophageal cancer alone in the bisphosphonate and contro

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

81 e chemotherapy improves survival in operable esophageal cancer and should be considered as a standard

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

83 iew the involvement of miRNAs in gastric and esophageal cancers and their mechanisms of regulation, e

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

87 status and outcome of patients with lung and esophageal cancers, and support clinical use of mithramy

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

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

90 1 y; 113 men, 17 women) with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer before definitive radiochemotherapy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

98 uggest a link between bisphosphonate use and esophageal cancer, but this has not been robustly invest

99 detected as high-grade dysplasia (HGD), most esophageal cancers can be prevented.

100 1 years (1992-2010), there were 341 incident esophageal cancer cases, of which 142 were esophageal ad

101 red LKB1-CRTC signaling in a subset of human esophageal cancer cell lines and patient samples.

102 Earlier, mapping of the 9p23-24 amplicon in esophageal cancer cell lines led us to the positional cl

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

104 In 13 esophageal cancer cell lines, 3 of the 9 SCC cell lines

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

106 LKB1 negatively regulates esophageal cancer cell migration and invasion in vitro.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

114 In this study, we observed that exposure of esophageal cancer cells to cigarette smoke condensate (C

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

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

117 proliferation and tumorigenicity of lung and esophageal cancer cells.

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

121 Using Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration data, we sought to (1) c

122 al cancer were identified from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration database.

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

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

125 HIV and esophageal cancer deaths were significantly related to m

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

127 Esophageal cancers demonstrate marked molecular heteroge

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

129 Esophageal cancers develop systems to evade anti-tumor i

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

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

132 onoid intake was not associated with overall esophageal cancer, EAC, or ESCC risk, although total fla

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 high-risk patients can aid the prevention of 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 ith increased survival for all patients with esophageal cancer except at the extremes (TisN0M0 and >o

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

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

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

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

152 iopsy after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for esophageal cancer has been used to determine response to

153 The number of esophagectomies performed for esophageal cancer has increased over the past decade acc

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

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

156 Severe bone pain and esophageal cancer have been described among bisphosphona

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

158 isms of LKB1 and CRTC in the pathogenesis of esophageal cancer have not been previously investigated.

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

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

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

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

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

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

165 fication of PET/CT in the primary staging of esophageal cancer in a cohort of patients with mature su

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

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

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

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

170 with reduced risk of colorectal and stomach/esophageal cancers in Chinese women.

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

172 Esophageal cancer incidence is increasing and has few tr

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

174 Esophageal cancer is a deadly disease, ranking sixth amo

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

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

177 Esophageal cancer is characterized by early and frequent

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

179 Esophageal cancer is increasing in frequency in the Unit

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

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

182 for more than half of all human cancers, and esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer d

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

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

185 noma (ESCC), the major histologic subtype of esophageal cancer, is a devastating disease characterize

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

195 ups of patients, including those with gastro-esophageal cancer, noncancer diseases of the upper gastr

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

197 confidence interval, 0.74-1.25]) or risk of esophageal cancer only (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07 [95%

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

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

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

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

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

203 way are associated with clinical outcomes in esophageal cancer patients with adenocarcinoma or squamo

204 Esophageal cancer patients with pathologic lymph-node in

205 Esophageal cancer patients with pathological complete re

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

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

208 of baseline PET image-derived parameters in esophageal cancer patients.

209 for therapy response and overall survival in esophageal cancer patients.

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

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

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

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

214 ling might represent a crucial mechanism for esophageal cancer progression.

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

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

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

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

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

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

221 ally significantly associated with a reduced esophageal cancer risk (HR (log(2)) = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.56

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

223 sses, particularly flavonols, may reduce the esophageal cancer risk among current smokers.

224 ly investigated dietary flavonoid intake and esophageal cancer risk in the European Prospective Inves

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

226 omers tended to be inversely associated with esophageal cancer risk.

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

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

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

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

231 esophageal cancer is associated with reduced 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 the multivariate analysis, women had longer esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS) than men in b

235 In early-stage esophageal cancer, spray cryotherapy appears to have a u

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

244 Esophageal cancer surgery carries a risk of splenic inju

245 ost complete nationwide coverage and data on esophageal cancer surgery collected prospectively betwee

246 ospital and surgeon volume on survival after esophageal cancer surgery deserves clarification, partic

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

248 Outcome reporting after esophageal cancer surgery is heterogeneous and inconsist

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

250 independently influences the prognosis after esophageal cancer surgery, centralization of this surger

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

252 nd splenic injury supports centralization of esophageal cancer surgery.

253 iew summarizes reporting of complications of esophageal cancer surgery.

254 nd used in all studies reporting outcomes of esophageal cancer surgery.

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

256 ational training and mentorship programs for esophageal cancer surgery.

257 The prognostic value of sex for esophageal cancer survival is currently unclear, and gro

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

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

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

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

262 Tylosis esophageal cancer (TOC) is an autosomal-dominant syndrom

263 Fifty patients with esophageal cancer treated with concomitant radiochemothe

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

267 l adenocarcinoma (EAC) is the most prevalent esophageal cancer type in the United States.

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

269 39 consecutive patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer underwent conventional staging investi

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

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

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

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

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

275 could affect the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer, we investigated the primary hypothesi

276 ng receptor tyrosine kinases associated with esophageal cancers, we have identified EPHB4 to be robus

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

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

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

280 ata on patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were extracted from a national adminis

281 627 patients who had esophagectomy alone for esophageal cancer were identified from the Worldwide Eso

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

283 -OES18 (the disease site-specific module for esophageal cancer) were used to assess HRQL 6 months, 3

284 s biomarkers to guide therapy of gastric and esophageal cancers where targeted therapeutics have been

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

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

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

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

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

290 ple database, yearly trends of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent partial and total esopha

291 rt for this study consisted of patients with esophageal cancer who were treated surgically between 20

292 role of RHBDF2 in growth-factor signaling in esophageal cancer will help to determine whether targeti

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

294 tients with BE, approximately 2% will die of esophageal cancer within 10 years.

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

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

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

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

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

300 with poor outcome in patients with lung and esophageal cancers, yet the underlying mechanisms remain