Bibliometric examination of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in esophageal cancer: insights, trends, collaborative networks, and prospective directions

Introduction

Esophageal cancer (EC) ranks as the seventh most prevalent cancer and the sixth leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, characterized by a notably poor prognosis (1). Due to the subtlety of early symptoms, approximately 70% of patients are diagnosed at a locally advanced or more severe stage (2). The 5-year survival rate with surgical intervention alone is a mere 20% (3). In cases of non-metastatic EC, where the tumor remains relatively localized without extensive distant metastasis, neoadjuvant therapy plays a crucial role. This therapeutic approach can reduce the primary tumor size, decrease tumor staging, eradicate micrometastases, enhance the R0 resection rate, and extend patient survival. Extensive clinical trials, such as NEOCRTEC5010 and CROSS, have demonstrated that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), when combined with surgery, offers a survival advantage (4). Traditionally, nCRT has been regarded as the standard treatment to improve outcomes in localized EC (5). However, as research progresses, it has been observed that neither nCRT nor chemotherapy alone achieves the anticipated survival benefits, highlighting an urgent need for novel adjuvant treatment strategies (6).

The introduction of immunotherapy has significantly transformed the paradigm of medical oncology treatment. Its primary mechanism involves the restoration of T cell activity by inhibiting the signaling pathways that suppress immune responses between tumor cells and immune cells, thereby enhancing the body’s anti-tumor immune response (7). Currently, immunotherapy has demonstrated substantial clinical efficacy in treating malignancies such as melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (8). In the context of EC, immunotherapy has initially been employed in patients with advanced stages of the disease. Clinical trials, including KEYNOTE-590, CheckMate648, and ORIENT-15, have reported favorable survival outcomes, establishing a foundation for the subsequent application of immunotherapy in the treatment of EC (9).

The CheckMate577 trial results indicated that postoperative adjuvant immunotherapy effectively enhanced disease-free survival, highlighting its potential in early intervention (10). Additionally, preoperative immunotherapy reduces the risk of recurrence after surgery by activating T cells in the tumor microenvironment and eliminating micrometastases (11). Several clinical studies have demonstrated that neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) can significantly increase the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate by 30% to 50%, outperforming traditional treatments (12-14). Furthermore, immunotherapy may work synergistically with chemoradiotherapy by releasing tumor antigens and enhancing immunogenic cell death, thereby improving local control rates (12,15). Given the rapid advancement of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in EC and its growing clinical significance, a detailed global analysis of neoadjuvant therapy research for EC is necessary, although such research has not yet been conducted.

Bibliometrics is a prevalent scientometric approach employed to systematically evaluate the academic productivity and impact of a research domain through multi-level analyses conducted by researchers, organizations, and countries. This method examines publication patterns to elucidate the field’s development, identify emerging frontiers, and highlight knowledge gaps (16). According to our team’s findings, this study represents the inaugural bibliometric analysis of neoadjuvant therapy for EC. The objective of this article is to augment the understanding of the current status, recent advancements, and emerging trends in this domain for esophageal surgeons, thereby serving as a reference for future related research endeavors. We present this article in accordance with the BIBLIO reporting checklist (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-2025-963/rc).

Methods

Data sources and literature search strategies

The data for this study were sourced from the Science Citation Index Expanded database within the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC). Following extensive team discussions and consultations with senior experts in literature retrieval, we developed the search strategy as follows: TS = ((esophag* OR oesophag*) AND (cancer OR carcinoma OR tumor OR neoplasm)) AND TS = (neoadjuvant OR preoperative therap* OR preoperative treatment OR neoadjuvant chemotherap* OR neoadjuvant radiotherap* OR neoadjuvant chemoradi* OR NAT) AND TS = (immunotherap* OR immune checkpoint inhibitor OR PD-1 OR PD-L1 OR CTLA-4 OR immuno-oncolog* OR cancer immunotherap* OR adaptive immunotherap* OR immune-modulat* therap*). This search strategy determined the final data time span, which was set from 2008 to 2024. A total of 562 articles were retrieved. The retrieval process was conducted by two independent researchers on February 1, 2025. We excluded specific categories of publications, including book chapters, editorial materials, corrections, and conference papers, resulting in a total of 509 articles selected for further analysis. The detailed research flowchart is presented in Figure 1. The documents were exported in plain text format, specifically in the “Full Record and Cited Reference” format. Each document record encompasses pertinent information necessary for analysis, such as the title, author, keywords, abstract, and additional relevant data.

Figure 1 Flowchart of the study. WOSCC, Web of Science Core Collection.

Statistical analysis

This study was primarily conducted utilizing R software version 4.4.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) in conjunction with R Studio. The foundational analysis was executed using the “Bibliometrix” package within the R environment, encompassing citation sorting, examination of authors and collaborators, analysis of authors’ affiliated institutions and countries, as well as keyword trend analysis (17). Additionally, CiteSpace version 5.8 R5 was employed to analyze and visualize the number of publications by countries, institutions, and authors, as well as assessing keyword centrality, frequency, and emergent trends. Furthermore, VOSviewer version 1.6.19 was utilized to investigate journals, co-cited articles, and highly cited articles (18).

Results

Analysis of publication trends

A comprehensive analysis of the literature from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2024, yielded a total of 509 articles on the topic of “neoadjuvant immunotherapy for esophageal cancer”. This body of work involved contributions from 43 countries/regions, 815 institutions, and 3,810 authors. On average, each article received 19 citations, culminating in a total of 10,071 citations. Figure 2 illustrates the annual publication trends and the average annual citation volume for global research on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC from 2008 to 2024. Notably, there has been a marked increase in research output over the past decade. This upward trend is substantiated by an index-fitting curve, which yields an adjusted regression coefficient (R²) of 0.98, signifying a consistent rise in publication activity. This suggests a growing scholarly interest in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC over the last 10 years. However, while the number of publications has surged, the average number of citations per publication has exhibited a slight decline, particularly after 2018, indicating a divergence between publication volume and citation impact.

Figure 2 Annual publication trends and average annual citations.

National publications and analysis of collaborations

The study conducted a comprehensive analysis of the global distribution of publications by country or region (Figure 3A), the total number of publications (Figure 3B), and the collaborative networks (Figure 3C) pertaining to research on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. As depicted in Figure 3A,3B, China (including Taiwan) leads with 284 publications, followed by the United States (n=95), Japan (n=54), Germany (n=31), and the United Kingdom (n=27). Other countries each contribute fewer than 25 publications. Figure 3C illustrates that China is a predominant contributor in the field of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. Furthermore, the United States, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom also exert significant influence. In contrast, countries such as Argentina, the Czech Republic, and Portugal, which are not interconnected in the network, exhibit limited international collaboration. These findings indicate that China, the United States, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom are pivotal in advancing research in this domain. Nonetheless, there is a pressing need to enhance global collaboration.

Figure 3 Each country/region’s contribution to the esophageal neoadjuvant immunotherapy. (A) Map distribution of publications in different countries. (B) Number of publications by country. (C) Collaborative networks of countries.

Institutional publications and collaborative analysis

Figure 4 provides a comprehensive analysis of institutional contributions and collaborations in the field of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. Specifically, Figure 4A depicts the distribution of publications across various institutions, highlighting that Fudan University, Zhengzhou University, Sun Yat-sen University, and the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences collectively account for the majority of publications. Figure 4B emphasizes the pivotal role of certain institutions as intermediaries in research collaboration, with the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Tongji University, the University of Texas System, Harvard Medical School, the University of California System, and the University of Amsterdam demonstrating significant centrality (centrality >0.1). Furthermore, Figure 4C presents a network diagram illustrating the collaborative relationships among research institutions. Notably, it highlights the partnerships between Fudan University, Sichuan University, Zhengzhou University, and Fujian Medical University, as well as their extensive collaborations with prominent international institutions such as MD Anderson Cancer Center and Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. The University of Amsterdam and other key institutions also play a crucial role in this collaborative network.

Figure 4 Each Institutions contribution to the esophageal neoadjuvant immunotherapy. (A) Number of publications by institution. (B) Intermediary centrality of institutions. (C) Collaborative networks of institutions.

Analysis of the number of journals published and their impact

Table 1 presents the leading 15 journals that have published more than five articles, along with their 2023 impact factors. Notably, “Frontiers in Immunology” ranks first with 43 publications. The majority of these journals are classified within the Q1 and Q2 quartiles according to the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) divisions.

Analysis of authors, publications, and collaboration

Our study also examined the quantity of published papers and the collaborative partnerships among researchers in the domain of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. As depicted in Figure 5, 11 authors have each published eight or more papers. Figure 6 presents the author collaboration network diagram, where the nodes symbolize the authors and the connections between the nodes represent the cooperative relationships among them. The size of each node indicates the author’s level of activity and influence within the collaborative network.

Figure 5 Each author’s contribution to the esophageal neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Figure 6 Collaborative networks of authors.

Analysis of research hotspots and trends

Analysis of highly co-cited literature

Using VOSviewer, we mapped co-cited articles, identifying 13,857 citations. Setting a minimum citation threshold of 50 reduced the analysis to 40 documents. In the network diagram, highly co-cited references are clustered in red and green (Figure 7). The most cited article, “Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer” [2012], demonstrated that significantly improved overall survival in patients with resectable esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancer, with manageable adverse events. The subsequent notable study, the CheckMate577 trial by Kelly et al., found that adjuvant nivolumab significantly extended disease-free survival compared to placebo in patients who had undergone nCRT for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer resection (19).

Figure 7 Cluster mapping of highly co-cited literature.

Analysis of highly cited literature

This study conducted an analysis of the first ten articles in the literature on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC that have garnered over 100 citations, as detailed in Table 2. Among the most highly cited works are ATTRACTION-4 (20), PALACE-1 (21), EONIPIGA (22), PERFECT (23), and studies on camrelizumab or sintilimab combined with chemotherapy (24,25). These articles underscore the significant potential of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant treatment of EC. Notably, they highlight the favorable safety profile of these therapies in enhancing pathological complete response rates and improving long-term survival outcomes.

Analysis of hot and trending topics

We employed a Tree map to illustrate the distribution of research topics pertaining to neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC (Figure 8). Traditional treatment modalities are predominantly represented by surgery (n=106), chemotherapy (n=103), and radiotherapy (n=36). In the realm of neoadjuvant immunotherapy, significant attention is directed towards immunotherapy (n=64) and PD-1 inhibitors, specifically nivolumab (n=75) and pembrolizumab (n=33). Combination therapies, such as chemoradiotherapy (n=127), also constitute a major research focus. Concurrently, research topics including phase III clinical trials (n=39), multicenter studies (n=49), and open-label studies (n=121) contribute substantially to the field. Moreover, there is notable research investment in areas such as prognosis, survival, efficacy, and safety.

Figure 8 Tree map of co-keywords.

Figure 9 depicts the interconnections among the top 50 keywords, categorizing them into four primary clusters via cluster analysis. Each cluster signifies a distinct knowledge structure and research trajectory within the field. The size of each node indicates the frequency of the corresponding keyword, while the thickness of the connecting lines denotes the co-occurrence frequency between pairs of keywords.

• The primary emphasis of the green cluster keywords is on chemotherapy, cancer, chemoradiotherapy, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, safety, efficacy, and immunotherapy, among others. The central focus is on the assessment of the efficacy of chemotherapy and immunotherapy.
• The primary emphasis is on the utilization of surgical interventions and preoperative chemoradiotherapy combinations in the treatment of EC, as indicated by the yellow cluster keywords: surgery, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy plus surgery, multicenter, combination, trial, phase II, lung cancer, radiation therapy, among others.
• Red cluster keywords: squamous-cell carcinoma, gastroesophageal junction, EC, adenocarcinoma, nCRT, open-label, perioperative chemotherapy, gastric cancer, among others. The primary emphasis is on research concerning EC and its related clinical trials.
• Blue cluster keywords: survival, prognosis, carcinoma, expression, cells, blockade, radiation therapy, biomarkers, etc. The primary emphasis is on the analysis of biomarkers, the characteristics of cancer cells, and the prognosis of survival in patients.

Figure 9 Cluster mapping of co-keywords.

We performed a term frequency analysis to investigate the progression of research focal points in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC from 2008 to 2024. Figure 10 illustrates these research trends, with the X-axis denoting the year and the Y-axis indicating pertinent research terms. The size of the bubbles represents the frequency of term occurrence. During the period from 2008 to 2015, research was predominantly foundational, concentrating on terms such as “advanced malignancy”, “anticancer therapy”, “coagulation”, and “cytokines”. From 2015 to 2020, there was an increase in immune-related keywords such as “anti-PD-1 antibody”, “T-cell response”, and “immune cells”. Furthermore, terms like “combined modality therapy” and “concurrent chemoradiotherapy” suggested an expanding investigation into multimodal treatment strategies. Between 2020 and 2024, terms such as “pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy”, “1st-line treatment”, “chemoradiotherapy”, and “tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes” became prominent, highlighting a research focus on immune combination therapies, prospective clinical trials, and efficacy prediction.

Figure 10 Research trend topics of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for esophageal malignant tumors.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this study represents the inaugural bibliometric analysis of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. We included 509 articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria, with the objective of systematically summarizing the prevailing research topics, sources of literature, global impact, and prospective development trends within this field.

EC represents a highly aggressive malignancy with a poor prognosis, presenting a significant clinical challenge on a global scale (26,27). Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is prevalent in non-industrialized regions like Asia and Africa, with smoking, alcohol, and low fruit and vegetable intake as key risks. In contrast, esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is more common in Western countries, linked to gastroesophageal reflux disease, Barrett’s esophagus, and obesity. EAC typically affects the lower esophagus, while ESCC is found in the middle and upper sections, and ESCC generally has a poorer prognosis than EAC (28). The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors offers a novel therapeutic strategy for patients afflicted with EC. Research has further indicated that neoadjuvant therapies, when combined with immunotherapy, hold substantial potential for broader application (29). Our analysis reveals a consistent upward trend in scholarly publications concerning neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC, suggesting that this field is garnering increased scholarly attention (Figure 1). We posit that the successful adaptation of immunotherapy from advanced stages of EC to neoadjuvant settings (30), the limitations in efficacy associated with traditional treatment regimens (31), and the synergistic effects observed when neoadjuvant immunotherapy is combined with other modalities (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy) are pivotal factors propelling the rapid advancement of research in this domain (30). Consequently, it is anticipated that this area will continue to evolve in the forthcoming years.

China, the United States, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom are the leading contributors to neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC, as evidenced by their substantial number of publications and extensive global partnerships (Figure 3). The high incidence of EC in China (30), coupled with the leadership of Chinese scholars in numerous clinical trials of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (32), as well as the recent increase in Chinese government investment in cancer research (33), are significant factors contributing to China’s prominent role in this field. Concurrently, many other countries are actively engaged in global collaborations, underscoring the need for further strengthening of international cooperation in the future.

Fudan University, Zhengzhou University, Sun Yat-sen University, and China Medical Sciences have been the primary contributors to the body of literature on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. Concurrently, Fudan University, alongside other domestic institutions, has established a robust collaborative network, engaging extensively with internationally esteemed institutions such as the MD Anderson Cancer Center and the University of Amsterdam. Furthermore, collaborative efforts among European institutions have significantly advanced research in this domain.

The journals “Frontiers in Immunology”, “Frontiers in Oncology”, and “Cancers” have emerged as the leading publications in terms of the volume of articles published on neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. Regarding authorship, Qixun Chen, Yin Li, and Yang Yang have distinguished themselves as the most prolific contributors in this domain. Additionally, Yong Yan, Jianqun Ma, and Yong Li have been identified as key co-authors, playing a central role in the collaborative research efforts within this field.

We conducted an analysis of the hotspots and research trends within the domain of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC by employing high co-citation analysis, highly cited article analysis, and topic analysis. The findings suggest that the primary research focuses and emerging trends in the current landscape of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC encompass treatment modalities, efficacy evaluation, and the identification of biomarkers. Among treatment modalities, nICT emerges as the most extensively investigated combination strategy. A meta-analysis by Liu et al. revealed that the pCR and major pathological response (MPR) rates were 28% and 57%, respectively, in the nICT group, and 38% and 67%, respectively, in the neoadjuvant immunochemoradiotherapy (nICRT) group. Regarding safety, the incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events was significantly higher in the nICRT group compared to the nICT group (58%, I²=61% vs. 18%, I²=79%, P<0.001). Further clinical trials are warranted to ascertain which combination model offers greater therapeutic benefit (13). To achieve a balance between treatment efficacy and the potential for adverse effects, Li et al. proposed a neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NRIT) regimen that does not incorporate chemotherapy. Clinical trials conducted by the research team indicated a pathological complete response rate of 47.4% and an MPR rate of 68.4% (31). Nonetheless, the existing evidence predominantly stems from small-scale studies, and there is a lack of large-scale trials demonstrating the superiority of this regimen over conventional treatments. Therefore, further high-quality research is essential to substantiate its clinical efficacy, safety, and optimal application contexts.

Currently, the assessment of the efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC primarily focuses on pathological remission, while the analysis of survival outcomes is hindered by a lack of long-term data (34,35). Yang et al. developed an innovative radiomics model utilizing ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, which successfully predicted the pCR to nICT in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (36). This model may serve as a valuable reference for radiomics-based predictions following neoadjuvant immunotherapy in EC.

In general, while elevated programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is associated with the effectiveness of immunotherapy in EC, accurately assessing PD-L1 status in clinical settings remains challenging due to the temporal and spatial heterogeneity of PD-L1 detection (37). Recently, blood-based biomarkers have garnered significant attention due to their accessibility, capacity for dynamic monitoring, and non-invasive nature (38). A retrospective study indicated that the ratio of CD16⁺CD56⁺ lymphocytes to CD4⁺/CD8⁺ in peripheral blood possesses predictive value regarding the efficacy of programmed death 1 inhibitors in patients with advanced ESCC (39). Furthermore, inflammation and nutritional indicators, such as the systemic inflammation score and prognostic nutritional index, along with tumor-associated antigens like carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and cytokine profiles, are under investigation (40-44). These markers have demonstrated potential in predicting treatment efficacy and prognosis; however, they encounter challenges related to high heterogeneity, non-standardized detection methods, and complex dynamic changes. Future efforts should focus on optimizing the marker system through prospective validation in large sample cohorts to enhance clinical guidance.

This study is subject to certain limitations. Firstly, the data sources are confined to the WOSCC database, potentially resulting in incomplete literature searches and the exclusion of pertinent studies available in other databases. Secondly, the analysis is restricted to literature published in English, which may introduce language bias and fail to fully capture the breadth of research findings in the field of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC. Despite these limitations, we contend that this study offers a comprehensive overview of the topic and serves as a valuable reference for clinical research. We hope that this bibliometric and visual analysis will inspire further research and generate new insights in this domain.

Conclusions

Currently, the field of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for EC is experiencing rapid advancement. Regarding treatment modalities, combination strategies such as nICT and nICRT have demonstrated promising potential. However, the optimal combination strategy requires further refinement. Additionally, the system for evaluating treatment efficacy is evolving from simple pathological assessments to multimodal comprehensive evaluations. Biomarker research is also transitioning from single indicators to integrated models, aiming to lay the groundwork for individualized treatment approaches in the future. Future research should prioritize the following areas: (I) conducting large-scale phase III randomized controlled trials to compare the benefits and drawbacks of various immunotherapy combination models; (II) establishing standardized criteria for evaluating the specific efficacy of immunotherapy; and (III) utilizing multi-omics approaches to explore predictive biomarkers in depth. Furthermore, we assert that global collaboration in this field must be strengthened moving forward.

Acknowledgments

None.

Footnote

Reporting Checklist: The authors have completed the BIBLIO reporting checklist. Available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-2025-963/rc

Peer Review File: Available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-2025-963/prf

Funding: None.

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-2025-963/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

References

1. Zhou Y, Zhou J, Cai X, et al. Integrating (18)F-FDG PET/CT radiomics and body composition for enhanced prognostic assessment in patients with esophageal cancer. BMC Cancer 2024;24:1402. [Crossref] [PubMed]
2. Wang M, Dong W, Liu A, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy for resectable esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transl Cancer Res 2024;13:2735-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
3. Pubu S, Zhang JW, Yang J. Early diagnosis of esophageal cancer: How to put "early detection" into effect? World J Gastrointest Oncol 2024;16:3386-92. [Crossref] [PubMed]
4. Csontos A, Fazekas A, Szakó L, et al. Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2024;30:1621-35. [Crossref] [PubMed]
5. Ke J, Xie Y, Liang J, et al. Surgical intervention after neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer: a narrative review. J Thorac Dis 2023;15:2261-76. [Crossref] [PubMed]
6. Brand NR, Yang YW, Ding V, et al. Novel dual action PARP and microtubule polymerization inhibitor AMXI-5001 powerfully inhibits growth of esophageal carcinoma both alone and in combination with radiotherapy. Am J Cancer Res 2024;14:378-89. [Crossref] [PubMed]
7. Liu Y, Chen P, Wang H, et al. The landscape of immune checkpoints expression in non-small cell lung cancer: a narrative review. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2021;10:1029-38. [Crossref] [PubMed]
8. Lin J, Xu A, Jin J, et al. MerTK-mediated efferocytosis promotes immune tolerance and tumor progression in osteosarcoma through enhancing M2 polarization and PD-L1 expression. Oncoimmunology 2022;11:2024941. [Crossref] [PubMed]
9. Liu J, Gao D, Li J, et al. The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Factors in Advanced, Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Camrelizumab. Onco Targets Ther 2022;15:1161-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
10. Feng J, Wang L, Yang X, et al. Adjuvant immunotherapy after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a real-world study. Front Immunol 2024;15:1456193. [Crossref] [PubMed]
11. Qiu Z, Li Z, Liu X, et al. From tumor microenvironment to emerging biomarkers: the reshaping of the esophageal squamous cell carcinoma tumor microenvironment by neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy. Front Immunol 2024;15:1478922. [Crossref] [PubMed]
12. Tian Y, Shi Z, Wang C, et al. A Comparison of Clinicopathologic Outcomes and Patterns of Lymphatic Spread Across Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy, and Neoadjuvant Immunochemotherapy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2024;31:860-71. [Crossref] [PubMed]
13. Liu Y, Bao Y, Yang X, et al. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy in esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Immunol 2023;14:1117448. [Crossref] [PubMed]
14. Janjigian YY, Al-Batran SE, Wainberg ZA, et al. Perioperative Durvalumab in Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer. N Engl J Med 2025;393:217-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
15. Zhang H, Zhang Z, Yang L, et al. Perioperative outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective comparative cohort study. J Thorac Dis 2023;15:1279-88. [Crossref] [PubMed]
16. Gao K, Dou Y, Lv M, et al. Research hotspots and trends of microRNA in periodontology and dental implantology: a bibliometric analysis. Ann Transl Med 2021;9:1122. [Crossref] [PubMed]
17. Aria M, Cuccurullo C. bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr 2017;11:959-75.
18. Wu PN, Liu JL, Fang MJ, et al. Global trends in colorectal cancer and metabolic syndrome research: a bibliometric and visualization analysis. Int J Surg 2024;110:3723-33. [Crossref] [PubMed]
19. Kelly RJ, Ajani JA, Kuzdzal J, et al. Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer. N Engl J Med 2021;384:1191-203. [Crossref] [PubMed]
20. Kang YK, Chen LT, Ryu MH, et al. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative, untreated, unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ATTRACTION-4): a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2022;23:234-47.
21. Li C, Zhao S, Zheng Y, et al. Preoperative pembrolizumab combined with chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (PALACE-1). Eur J Cancer 2021;144:232-41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
22. André T, Tougeron D, Piessen G, et al. Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab and Adjuvant Nivolumab in Localized Deficient Mismatch Repair/Microsatellite Instability-High Gastric or Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma: The GERCOR NEONIPIGA Phase II Study. J Clin Oncol 2023;41:255-65. [Crossref] [PubMed]
23. van den Ende T, de Clercq NC, van Berge Henegouwen MI, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Combined with Atezolizumab for Resectable Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Single-arm Phase II Feasibility Trial (PERFECT). Clin Cancer Res 2021;27:3351-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
24. Liu J, Yang Y, Liu Z, et al. Multicenter, single-arm, phase II trial of camrelizumab and chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Immunother Cancer 2022;10:e004291. [Crossref] [PubMed]
25. Yang W, Xing X, Yeung SJ, et al. Neoadjuvant programmed cell death 1 blockade combined with chemotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Immunother Cancer 2022;10:e003497. [Crossref] [PubMed]
26. Shi H, Luo J, Ye L, et al. SH2D4A inhibits esophageal squamous cell carcinoma progression through FAK/PI3K/AKT signaling pathway. Cell Signal 2024;114:110997. [Crossref] [PubMed]
27. Liu CQ, Ma YL, Qin Q, et al. Epidemiology of esophageal cancer in 2020 and projections to 2030 and 2040. Thorac Cancer 2023;14:3-11. [Crossref] [PubMed]
28. Bucchi D, Stracci F, Buonora N, et al. Human papillomavirus and gastrointestinal cancer: A review. World J Gastroenterol 2016;22:7415-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
29. Zhang XJ, Yu Y, Zhao HP, et al. Mechanisms of tumor immunosuppressive microenvironment formation in esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2024;30:2195-208. [Crossref] [PubMed]
30. Wang W, Ye L, Li H, et al. A narrative review on advances in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for esophageal cancer: Molecular biomarkers and future directions. Int J Cancer 2025;156:20-33. [Crossref] [PubMed]
31. Li M, Sun H, Yang W, et al. A Phase 1b Clinical Trial of Neoadjuvant Radio-immunotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024;119:896-901. [Crossref] [PubMed]
32. Zhang J, Zhao P, Xu R, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of perioperative immunochemotherapeutic strategies for locally advanced esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Front Immunol 2024;15:1478377. [Crossref] [PubMed]
33. Zhang C, Wu P, Li D, et al. A Call for Innovative Translational and Clinical Research to Address China's Unique Cancer Landscape. Cancer Discov 2024;14:2028-32. [Crossref] [PubMed]
34. Wang M, Wei D, Cui Z, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Thorac Dis 2025;17:1711-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
35. He W, Wang C, Li C, et al. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Immunol 2023;14:1118902. [Crossref] [PubMed]
36. Yang M, Li X, Cai C, et al. [18F]FDG PET-CT radiomics signature to predict pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study. Eur Radiol 2024;34:4352-63.
37. Wang X, Wang P, Huang X, et al. Biomarkers for immunotherapy in esophageal cancer. Front Immunol 2023;14:1117523. [Crossref] [PubMed]
38. Pan Y, Jin X, Hong J, et al. Blood biomarkers to predict the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2024;13:2773-86. [Crossref] [PubMed]
39. Sun J, Gan W, Yao J, et al. Peripheral blood lymphocyte subpopulations as predictive biomarkers for first-line programmed death 1 inhibitors efficacy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2024;103:e39967. [Crossref] [PubMed]
40. Yoneda A, Ogata R, Ryu S, et al. Prognostic value of systemic inflammation score in patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2024;86:3852-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
41. Wang HK, Wei Q, Yang YL, et al. Clinical usefulness of the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio and aggregate index of systemic inflammation in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer Cell Int 2023;23:13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
42. Wu M, Zhu Y, Chen X, et al. Prognostic nutritional index predicts the prognosis of patients with advanced esophageal cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a retrospective cohort study. J Gastrointest Oncol 2023;14:54-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
43. Zhang R, Tian W, Zhao H, et al. Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on serum transforming growth factor-β, squamous cell carcinoma associated antigen, and prognosis in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand) 2023;69:112-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
44. Cabalag CS, Prall OWJ, Ciciulla J, et al. Tumor-Infiltrating Neutrophils after Neoadjuvant Therapy are Associated with Poor Prognosis in Esophageal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2023;30:1614-25. [Crossref] [PubMed]