Role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in clinical T2N0M0 esophageal cancer: A population-based cohort study

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 620-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Goense ◽  
Els Visser ◽  
Nadia Haj Mohammad ◽  
Stella Mook ◽  
Rob H.A. Verhoeven ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 15-15
Author(s):  
Alicia Borggreve ◽  
Peter Van Rossum ◽  
Stella Mook ◽  
Nadia Haj Mohammad ◽  
Richard Hillegersberg ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Esophagectomy functions as the cornerstone of the curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. The addition of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) to surgery improves survival, but can be accompanied by substantial toxicity on the other hand. This cohort study describes the consequences of nCRT for esophageal cancer in terms of mortality (during or after the course of nCRT) in real-world clinical practice, as well as the proportion of patients that do not proceed to planned esophagectomy after finishing nCRT. Methods All patients that started nCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel with 41.4 Gy) for primary, locally advanced, esophageal cancer in 2015 were included from the nationwide population-based cancer registry. Outcome measurements were mortality during or within 90 days after neoadjuvant therapy (and before planned esophagectomy), as well as refrainment from planned esophagectomy after starting nCRT and the reasons for cancelled esophagectomy. Results Some 740 patients that started nCRT for esophageal cancer were included (Table 1). A total of 13 (1.8%) patients died during or within 90 days after nCRT (before planned esophagectomy). A total of 79 (10.7%) patients that started nCRT did not proceed to esophagectomy. The most frequently reported reasons for not proceeding to esophagectomy were tumor progression (4.6%, n = 34), performance status (2.7%, n = 20), and patients’ request (1.8%, n = 13). Conclusion In this population-based study, 1 in 10 (10.7%) patients that started nCRT for locally advanced esophageal cancer did not undergo esophagectomy. Further research should aim to investigate whether this patient group can be selected prior to treatment, and if interventions and counseling will result in a larger proportion of patients who will undergo surgery. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.


2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (10) ◽  
pp. 1919-1925
Author(s):  
Alicia S. Borggreve ◽  
Peter S.N. van Rossum ◽  
Stella Mook ◽  
Nadia Haj Mohammad ◽  
Richard van Hillegersberg ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Kamarajah ◽  
A Phillips ◽  
G Hanna ◽  
D Low ◽  
S Markar

Abstract   Ongoing randomized controlled trials seek to evaluate the potential organ-preservation strategy of definitive chemoradiotherapy as a primary treatment for esophageal cancer. This population-based cohort study aimed to assess survival following definitive chemoradiotherapy (DCR) with or without salvage esophagectomy (SALV) in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Methods Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2015, was used to identify patients with non-metastatic esophageal cancer receiving either DCR (n = 5,977) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with planned esophagectomy (NCRS) (n = 13,555). Propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection bias. Subset analyses compared patients receiving salvage esophagectomy after DCR (SALV) with NCRS. Results Comparison of baseline demographics of the unmatched cohort revealed that patients receiving NCRS were younger, had a lower burden of medical comorbidities, lower proportion of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and more positive lymph nodes. Following matching, NCRS was associated with significantly improved survival compared with DCR (HR: 0.60, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.57—0.63, p < 0.001), which persisted in subset analyses of patients with adenocarcinoma (HR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.56—0.63, p < 0.001) and SCC (HR: 0.58, 95%CI: 0.53—0.63, p < 0.001). There was no difference in overall survival between SALV and NCRS (HR: 1.00, 95%CI: 0.90—1.11, p = 1.0). Conclusion Surgery remains an integral component of the management of patients with esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by planned esophagectomy appears to remain the optimum curative treatment regime in patients with loco-regional esophageal cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 143 (7) ◽  
pp. 1652-1661 ◽  
Author(s):  
Canqing Yu ◽  
Yu Guo ◽  
Zheng Bian ◽  
Ling Yang ◽  
Iona Y. Millwood ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. S184
Author(s):  
T. Barreto ◽  
D. Muñoz-Guglielmetti ◽  
M. Vázquez ◽  
D. Momblan ◽  
M. Mollà ◽  
...  

Allergy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 596-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jochen Schmitt ◽  
Eike Wüstenberg ◽  
Denise Küster ◽  
Victoria Mücke ◽  
Niels Serup‐Hansen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document