Header Logo

Connection

Co-Authors

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications co-authored by WAYNE L HOFSTETTER and JEFFREY H LEE.
WAYNE L HOFSTETTER
Connection Strength
1.224
JEFFREY H LEE
  1. Pathologic T0N1 esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery: an orphan status. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Sep; 90(3):884-90; discussion 890-1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.092
  2. Endoscopic esophageal tumor length: a prognostic factor for patients with esophageal cancer. Cancer. 2011 Jan 01; 117(1):63-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  3. Geographic distribution of regional metastatic nodes affects the outcome of trimodality-eligible patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Oncology. 2015; 88(6):332-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  4. Importance of surveillance and success of salvage strategies after definitive chemoradiation in patients with esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct 20; 32(30):3400-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  5. A validated miRNA profile predicts response to therapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer. 2014 Dec 01; 120(23):3635-41.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  6. Post-chemoradiation surgical pathology stage can customize the surveillance strategy in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014 Aug; 12(8):1139-44.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  7. Clinical staging of patients with early esophageal adenocarcinoma: does FDG-PET/CT have a role? J Thorac Oncol. 2014 Aug; 9(8):1202-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  8. Distribution and timing of distant metastasis after local therapy in a large cohort of patients with esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer. Oncology. 2014; 86(5-6):336-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  9. Hippo coactivator YAP1 upregulates SOX9 and endows esophageal cancer cells with stem-like properties. Cancer Res. 2014 Aug 01; 74(15):4170-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  10. Factors associated with local-regional failure after definitive chemoradiation for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Jan; 21(1):306-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  11. ALDH-1 expression levels predict response or resistance to preoperative chemoradiation in resectable esophageal cancer patients. Mol Oncol. 2014 Feb; 8(1):142-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  12. Locoregional failure rate after preoperative chemoradiation of esophageal adenocarcinoma and the outcomes of salvage strategies. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Dec 01; 31(34):4306-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  13. Incidence of brain metastases after trimodality therapy in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal cancer: implications for screening and surveillance. Oncology. 2013; 85(4):204-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  14. The influence of histopathologic tumor viability on long-term survival and recurrence rates following neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2013 Sep; 258(3):500-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  15. Results of the baseline positron emission tomography can customize therapy of localized esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who achieve a clinical complete response after chemoradiation. Ann Oncol. 2013 Nov; 24(11):2854-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  16. A phase II randomized trial of induction chemotherapy versus no induction chemotherapy followed by preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2013 Nov; 24(11):2844-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  17. Propensity-based matching between esophagogastric cancer patients who had surgery and who declined surgery after preoperative chemoradiation. Oncology. 2013; 85(2):95-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  18. Association between clinical complete response and pathological complete response after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with gastroesophageal cancer: analysis in a large cohort. Ann Oncol. 2013 May; 24(5):1262-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  19. Outcome of trimodality-eligible esophagogastric cancer patients who declined surgery after preoperative chemoradiation. Oncology. 2012; 83(5):300-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  20. Salvage esophagectomy after failed definitive chemoradiation for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012 Oct; 94(4):1126-32; discussion 1132-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  21. A nomogram associated with high probability of malignant nodes in the surgical specimen after trimodality therapy of patients with oesophageal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2012 Dec; 48(18):3396-404.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  22. Clinical parameters model for predicting pathologic complete response following preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012 Oct; 23(10):2638-2642.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  23. Celiac node failure patterns after definitive chemoradiation for esophageal cancer in the modern era. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jun 01; 83(2):e231-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  24. Nomograms for prognostication of outcome in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal carcinoma undergoing definitive chemoradiotherapy. Oncology. 2012; 82(2):108-13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  25. Patients with high body mass index tend to have lower stage of esophageal carcinoma at diagnosis. Dis Esophagus. 2012 Sep-Oct; 25(7):614-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  26. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS in differentiating mucosal versus submucosal invasion of superficial esophageal cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Feb; 75(2):242-53.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  27. Duplicated muscularis mucosae invasion has similar risk of lymph node metastasis and recurrence-free survival as intramucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011 Jul; 35(7):1045-53.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  28. Update: modern approaches to the treatment of localized esophageal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2011 Jun; 13(3):157-67.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  29. Prognostic significance of baseline positron emission tomography and importance of clinical complete response in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Cancer. 2011 Nov 01; 117(21):4823-33.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  30. The influence of high body mass index on the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer after surgery as primary therapy. Cancer. 2010 Dec 15; 116(24):5619-27.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  31. Combined modality therapy of cT2N0M0 esophageal cancer: the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Cancer. 2011 Mar 01; 117(5):925-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  32. Critical role of surgery in patients with gastroesophageal carcinoma with a poor prognosis after chemoradiation as defined by positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2010 Oct 01; 116(19):4487-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  33. Improved long-term outcome with chemoradiotherapy strategies in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010 Sep; 90(3):892-8; discussion 898-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  34. The standardized uptake value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after chemoradiation and clinical outcome in patients with localized gastroesophageal carcinoma. Oncology. 2010; 78(5-6):316-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  35. Genome-wide catalogue of chromosomal aberrations in barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a high-density single nucleotide polymorphism array analysis. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2010 Sep; 3(9):1176-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  36. Trimodality therapy without a platinum compound for localized carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Cancer. 2010 Apr 01; 116(7):1656-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  37. The higher the decrease in the standardized uptake value of positron emission tomography after chemoradiation, the better the survival of patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer. 2009 Nov 15; 115(22):5184-92.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  38. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009 Sep; 88(3):862-8; discussion 868-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  39. Influence of the baseline 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography results on survival and pathologic response in patients with gastroesophageal cancer undergoing chemoradiation. Cancer. 2009 Feb 01; 115(3):624-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  40. Therapy-induced expression of NF-kappaB portends poor prognosis in patients with localized esophageal cancer undergoing preoperative chemoradiation. Dis Esophagus. 2009; 22(2):127-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  41. Influence of induction chemotherapy and class of cytotoxics on pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. Cancer. 2008 Sep 15; 113(6):1302-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  42. Lymphovascular invasion as a tool to further subclassify T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer. 2008 Mar 01; 112(5):1020-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  43. Value of endoscopic ultrasound staging in conjunction with the evaluation of lymphovascular invasion in identifying low-risk esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2008 Feb 01; 112(3):503-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  44. Preoperative chemo-radiation-induced ulceration in patients with esophageal cancer: a confounding factor in tumor response assessment in integrated computed tomographic-positron emission tomographic imaging. J Thorac Oncol. 2006 Jun; 1(5):478-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  45. Endoscopic ultrasonography-identified celiac adenopathy remains a poor prognostic factor despite preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006 Jan; 131(1):65-72.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.