Dataset Information

Hazard Curves for Tumor Recurrence and Tumor-Related Death Following Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The knowledge of both patterns and risk of relapse following resection for esophageal cancer is crucial for establishing appropriate surveillance schedules. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of hazards for tumor recurrence and tumor-related death in the postoperative long-term follow-up after esophagectomy. METHODS:Retrospective single-center analysis of 362 patients, with resected esophageal cancer. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used. RESULTS:A total of 192 (53%) had postoperative tumor recurrence. The relapse patterns of adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma showed that each had a single peak, 12 months after surgery. After induction there was one peak at 5 months, the non-induced patients peaked 11 months, postoperatively. At 18 months, the recurrence hazard declined sharply in all cases. The hazard curves for tumor-related death were bimodal for adenocarcinoma, with two peaks at 6 and 22 months and one single peak for squamous-cell carcinoma at 18 months after surgery, showing pronounced decline later on. CONCLUSION:In curatively resected esophageal cancer, both tumor recurrence hazard and hazard for tumor-related death showed distinct, partly bimodal patterns. It could be justified to intensify the surveillance during the first two postoperative years by initiating a close-meshed follow-up to detect and treat tumor recurrence, as early as possible.

SUBMITTER: Lindenmann J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7466063 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hazard Curves for Tumor Recurrence and Tumor-Related Death Following Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Lindenmann Joerg J Fediuk Melanie M Fink-Neuboeck Nicole N Porubsky Christian C Pichler Martin M Brcic Luka L Anegg Udo U Balic Marija M Dandachi Nadia N Maier Alfred A Smolle Maria M Smolle Josef J Smolle-Juettner Freyja Maria FM

Cancers 20200727 8

<h4>Background</h4>The knowledge of both patterns and risk of relapse following resection for esophageal cancer is crucial for establishing appropriate surveillance schedules. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of hazards for tumor recurrence and tumor-related death in the postoperative long-term follow-up after esophagectomy.<h4>Methods</h4>Retrospective single-center analysis of 362 patients, with resected esophageal cancer. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was used.<h ...[more]

PMID: 32726927

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatterns of overall and disease-free survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in older adults have not been carefully studied.MethodsRetrospective analysis of all patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy from 2005 to 2020 at our institution was performed. Differences in outcomes were stratified by age groups, < 75 and ≥ 75 years old, and two time periods, 2005-2012 and 2013-2020.ResultsA total of 1135 patients were included: 979 (86.3%) patients were < 75 (86.3%), and 156 (13.7%) were ≥ 75 years old. Younger patients had fewer comorbidities, better nutritional status, and were more likely to receive neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy (all p < 0.05). However, tumor stage and operative approach were similar, except for increased performance of the McKeown technique in younger patients (p = 0.02). Perioperatively, younger patients experienced fewer overall and grade II complications (both p < 0.05). They had better overall survival (log-rank p-value < 0.001) and median survival, 62.2 vs. 21.5 months (p < 0.05). When stratified by pathologic stage, survival was similar for yp0 and pathologic stage II disease (both log-rank p-value > 0.05). Multivariable Cox models showed older age (≥ 75 years old) had increased hazard for reduced overall survival (HR 2.04 95% CI 1.5-2.8; p < 0.001) but not disease-free survival (HR 1.1 95% CI 0.78-1.6; p = 0.54). Over time, baseline characteristics remained largely similar, while stage became more advanced with a rise in neoadjuvant use and increased performance of minimally invasive esophagectomy (all p < 0.05). While overall complication rates improved (p < 0.05), overall and recurrence-free survival did not. Overall survival was better in younger patients during both time periods (both log-rank p < 0.05).ConclusionsDespite similar disease-free survival rates, long-term survival was decreased in older adults as compared to younger patients. This may be related to unmeasured factors including frailty, long-term complications after surgery, and competing causes of death. However, our results suggest that survival is similar in those with complete pathologic responses.

Project description:Curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer consists of (neo)adjuvant treatment followed by esophagectomy. Both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and perioperative chemotherapy improve the 5-year overall survival rate compared with surgery alone. However, it is unknown whether these treatment strategies are associated with differences in long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL). The aim of this study is to compare long-term HRQL in patients after esophagectomy treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy. Disease-free cancer patients having undergone esophagectomy and (neo)adjuvant treatment in one of the participating lasting symptoms after esophageal resection (LASER) study centers between 2010 and 2016, were identified from the LASER study dataset. Included patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-OG25, and LASER questionnaires at least 1 year after the completion of treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy, using univariable and multivariable regression and presented as differences in mean score. Among the 565 included patients, 349 (61.8%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 216 (38.2%) perioperative chemotherapy. Patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy reported more symptomatology for diarrhea (difference in means 5.93), reflux (difference in means 7.40), and odynophagia (difference in means 4.66). The differences did not exceed the 10 points to be of clinical relevance. No significant differences for the LASER key symptoms were observed. The observed differences in long-term HRQL are in favor of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy; however, the differences were small. Patients need to be informed about long-term HRQL when considering allocation of (neo)adjuvant treatment.

Project description:IntroductionEsophagectomy is a key component in the curative treatment of esophageal cancer. Little is understood about the impact of smoking status on perioperative morbidity and mortality and the long-term outcome of patients following esophagectomy.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate morbidity and mortality according to smoking status in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing two-stage transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) for esophageal cancers (adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma) between January 1997 and December 2016 at the Northern Oesophagogastric Unit were included from a prospectively maintained database. The main explanatory variable was smoking status, defined as current smoker, ex-smoker, and non-smoker. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes included perioperative complications (overall, anastomotic leaks, and pulmonary complications) and survival (cancer-specific survival [CSS], recurrence-free survival [RFS]).ResultsDuring the study period, 1168 patients underwent esophagectomy for cancer. Of these, 24% (n = 282) were current smokers and only 30% (n = 356) had never smoked. The median OS of current smokers was significantly shorter than ex-smokers and non-smokers (median 36 vs. 42 vs. 48 months; p = 0.015). However, on adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in long-term OS between smoking status in the entire cohort. The overall complication rates were significantly higher with current smokers compared with ex-smokers or non-smokers (73% vs. 66% vs. 62%; p = 0.018), and there were no significant differences in anastomotic leaks and pulmonary complications between the groups. On subgroup analysis by receipt of neoadjuvant therapy and tumor histology, smoking status did not impact long-term survival in adjusted multivariable analyses.ConclusionAlthough smoking is associated with higher rates of short-term perioperative morbidity, it does not affect long-term OS, CSS, and RFS following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Therefore, implementation of perioperative pathways to optimize patients may help reduce the risk of complications.

Project description:To update our experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 445 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy between January 2009 and July 2015 at the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and used 103 patients who underwent open McKeown esophagectomy in the same period as controls. Among 375 patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, 180 in the early period were chosen for the study of learning curve of total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy. These 180 minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomies performed by five surgeons were divided into three groups according to time sequence as group 1 (n = 60), group 2 (n = 60) and group 3 (n = 60).Patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy had significantly less intraoperative blood loss than patients who underwent hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open McKeown esophagectomy (100 mL vs 300 mL vs 200 mL, P = 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in operation time, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy and open McKeown esophagectomy groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year survival between these three groups (60.5% vs 47.9% vs 35.6%, P = 0.735). Patients in group 1 had significantly longer duration of operation than those in groups 2 and 3. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between groups 1, 2 and 3.Total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss and comparable short term and long term survival compared with hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open Mckeown esophagectomy. At least 12 cases are needed to master total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a high volume center.

Project description:Background:Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE). Methods:Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results:T-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0% vs. 6.1%, P=0.083). The incidence rates of total (63.3% vs. 63.3%; P=1.000), abdominal (8.2% vs. 14.3%; P=0.366), and respiratory complications (10.2% vs. 10.2%; P=1.000) were not different between two groups. The number of harvested abdominal lymph nodes was similar (12.4±9.0 vs. 12.3±8.9; P=0.992). Median follow-up duration for T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE was 16.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rate (86.2% in T-RAMIE vs. 77.6% in H-RAMIE; P=0.150) and recurrence-free survival (76.6% in T-RAMIE vs. 62.2% in H-RAMIE; P=0.280) were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions:In this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.

Dataset Information

Hazard Curves for Tumor Recurrence and Tumor-Related Death Following Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Publications

Hazard Curves for Tumor Recurrence and Tumor-Related Death Following Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets