Dataset Information

Elective nodal irradiation?versus involved-field irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and involved-field irradiation (IFI) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (nCRTS). MATERIAL AND METHODS:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and major meetings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared at least two of the following treatment regimens: nCRTS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (nCTS), and surgery (S) alone. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcomes of interest, reported as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare all regimens simultaneously. RESULTS:Twenty-nine RCTs with a total of 5212 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both nCRTS adopting ENI (nCRTS-ENI) (HR?=?0.63, 95% CI: 0.48-0.83) and nCRTS adopting IFI (nCRTS-IFI) (HR?=?0.75, 95% CI: 0.66-0.86) significantly improved OS compared to S alone. No significant differences in OS, locoregional recurrence, distant metastases, R0 resection and postoperative mortality were observed between nCRTS-ENI and nCRTS-IFI. In subgroup analyses, nCRTS-IFI showed a significant OS advantage over nCTS (HR?=?0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96) and S alone (HR?=?0.50, 95% CI: 0.38-0.68) for esophagus squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but nCRTS-ENI did not; nCRTS-ENI using three-dimensional radiotherapy (3D-RT) resulted in an improved OS compared to that with 2D-RT (HR?=?0.58, 95% CI: 0.34-0.99). Based on treatment ranking in term of OS, nCRTS-IFI (0.90) and nCRTS-ENI (0.96) was ranked the most effective treatment for ESCC and esophagus adenocarcinoma (EAC), respectively. CONCLUSION:Either adopting ENI or IFI, nCRTS is likely to be the optimal treatment for resectable EC, and nCRTS-IFI and nCRTS-ENI seem to be more effective for patients with ESCC and EAC, respectively. Future head to head comparison trials are needed to confirm these findings.

SUBMITTER: Liu T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6794743 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Elective nodal irradiation versus involved-field irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis.

Liu Tingting T Ding Silu S Dang Jun J Wang Hui H Chen Jun J Li Guang G

Radiation oncology (London, England) 20191016 1

<h4>Background</h4>To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and involved-field irradiation (IFI) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (nCRTS).<h4>Material and methods</h4>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and major meetings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared at least two of the following treatment regimens: nCRTS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery ( ...[more]

PMID: 31619265

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze whether involved field irradiation (IFI) is associated with improving survival outcomes and reducing adverse events compared with elective nodal irradiation (ENI) in patients of esophageal cancer who underwent definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.Summary background dataRadiotherapy plays an important role for not surgery patients. However, the role of radiation target size is still uncertain.MethodsWe searched Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central for English and non-English publications comparing esophageal cancer patients who received radiotherapy with IFI with those with ENI. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and adverse events related to radiotherapy. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Standard for non-randomized studies. We evaluated the certainty of evidence by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.ResultsTotally, 23 studies with 4120 patients were included. IFI group demonstrated significant improvement in the OS rates at 5 years, but not at 1, 2, and 3 years, compared with the ENI group (pooled Risk Ratio [RR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.90; P = 0.0004; high certainty). In addition, IFI demonstrated a significant decrease in the incidence of grade ≥2 acute esophagitis (AE) (pooled RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90; P = 0.0005; high certainty) and grade ≥3 AE (pooled RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69; P < 0.00001; high certainty) compared with ENI, but not in the incidence of grades ≥3 acute pneumonia, late esophagitis, and late pneumonia.ConclusionsCompared to ENI, IFI demonstrated significant improvement in OS at 5 years. The addition of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to IFI increased the 5-year OS; however, similar results were not observed with the addition of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to IFI and ENI. Furthermore, IFI demonstrated a significant decrease in grade ≥2 and grade ≥3 AE, while IMRT demonstrated no difference in the incidence of grade ≥3 AE. IFI and ENI do not differ in the incidence of grades ≥3 acute pneumonia, late esophagitis, and late pneumonia.

Project description:BackgroundDefinitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (dCCRT) is suggested as the standard treatment for cervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CESCC). This retrospective propensity study compared the 8-year survival outcomes and acute treatment toxicities of these patients treated with elective nodal irradiation (ENI) versus involved-field irradiation (IFI).Materials and methodsPatients with stage II-IV CESCC treated with dCCRT at the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2020 were enrolled in the study. All the patients were restaged according to the American Joint Commission 8th edition criteria. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize the effects of treatment selection bias and potential confounding factors including sex, age, ECOG score, clinical T stage, clinical N stage, clinical TNM stage and radiation dose between the ENI group and IFI group. Survival and the prognostic factors were evaluated.ResultsThe 131 eligible patients underwent ENI (60 patients, 45.8%) or IFI (71 patients, 54.2%). The median follow-up time was 91.1 months (range, 23.8-182.0 months) for all the patients. The median OS, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year OS rates were 44.4 months, 87.8%, 55.1%, 38.3%, and 27.2%, respectively. After PSM, there were 49 patients in each group. The median OS, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year OS rates for ENI and IFI group were 32.0 months, 83.7%, 48.5%, 38.5% and 31.1% versus 45.2 months, 89.8%, 52.5%, 37.5%, 26.1%, respectively (P = 0.966; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.61-1.61). Similar locoregional control was obtained in both groups. The tendency of leukocytopenia and neutropenia was higher in ENI than in IFI (59.2% vs. 38.8%; P = 0.068 and 30.6% vs. 14.3%; P = 0.089) at the end of dCCRT.ConclusionCervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy has a satisfactory prognosis with organ conservation. The involved-field irradiation might be a better alternative owing to similar overall survival outcomes and local control with less toxicity of myelosuppression.

Project description:BackgroundThis study's initial results revealed significant decreases in treatment-related esophagitis and pneumonitis cases in patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated with involved-field irradiation (IFI), compared to elective nodal irradiation (ENI). This report outlines the long-term trial results, specifically; overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and locoregional progression-free survival (LRFS).Materials and methodsStage II-III thoracic ESCC patients were assigned randomly, in a 1:1 ratio, into either the ENI or IFI arm. Radiation therapy was delivered once a day in 1.8-2.0 Gy fractions to a total dose of 60.0-66.0 Gy to the gross tumor volume and 50.0-54.0 Gy to the clinical target volume. The primary endpoints were acute treatment-related esophagitis and pneumonitis. The results for the primary endpoints were previously published in 2018. In this article, we analyzed the secondary endpoints including PFS, LRFS, MFS, and OS.ResultsBetween April 2012 and October 2016, 228 patients from nine participating centers in China were enrolled into this study and randomly assigned to two treatment groups. For ENI and IFI groups, respectively, the results showed similarity and were as follows: median PFS (20.3 months vs 21.4 months), OS (32.5 months vs 34.9 months), MFS (28.2 months vs 26.0 months), and LRFS (25.0 months vs 26.6 months). In particular, respective OS rates in the ENI and IFI groups were 84.6% and 82.5% after 1 year, 45.1% and 48.7% after 3 years, and 29.8% and 30.7% at 5 years. PFS rates after 1, 3, and 5 years were 58.9%, 34.2%, and 26.9%, respectively, in the ENI arm compared to 64.4%, 30.8%, and 27.7%, respectively, in the IFI arm. Multivariate analysis identified clinical stage and tumor responses as independent predictors of OS. Meanwhile, tumor location, cStage, and tumor response were identified as independent factors influencing PFS.ConclusionIFI was associated with similar survival as ENI in patients with thoracic ESCC, suggesting that IFI is an acceptable treatment method for thoracic ESCC.

Dataset Information

Elective nodal irradiation?versus involved-field irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis.

Publications

Elective nodal irradiation versus involved-field irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets