The Effect of Timing of Adjuvant Therapy on Survival After Esophagectomy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) after esophagectomy improves survival in esophageal cancer when induction therapy is not given; however, the optimal timing for initiation of AC is poorly characterized. We aimed to determine the impact of timing of AC on survival after esophagectomy.Methods
The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with pT1-4aNxM0 esophageal cancer receiving AC with or without radiation from 2004 to 2015. The median and interquartile range of time to AC were determined. Patients were stratified by initiation of AC into 4 cohorts based on quartiles. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated and factors associated with survival were identified by Cox proportional hazards modeling. A separate analysis was performed with time to AC as a continuous variable.Results
A total of 1634 patients received AC after esophagectomy. Median time to receipt of AC was 59 (interquartile range, 45-78) days. There was no significant difference in overall survival at 5 years (P = .86) between groups. Median survival was 29 months in those receiving AC within 45 days and was 28 months in those receiving AC at other time points. On multivariable analysis, delay in receipt of AC beyond 45 days was not associated with inferior survival. This was preserved when time to AC was analyzed as a continuous variable (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.0).Conclusions
Timing of initiation of AC after esophagectomy does not appear to impact survival. Given the highly variable postoperative course after esophagectomy, the decision to start AC should involve multidisciplinary discussion and be made on a patient-by-patient basis.
SUBMITTER: Rhodin KE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7483824 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveDetermine whether adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a survival benefit in high risk T2-4a, pathologically node-negative distal esophageal adenocarcinoma.Summary of background dataThere is minimal literature to substantiate the NCCN guidelines recommending adjuvant therapy for patients with distal esophageal adenocarcinoma and no pathologic evidence of nodal disease.MethodsThe National Cancer Database was used to identify adult patients with pT2-4aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent definitive surgery (2004-2015) and had characteristics considered high risk by the NCCN. Patients were stratified by receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards models. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was also performed to compare survival between the groups.ResultsFour hundred three patients met study criteria: 313 (78%) without adjuvant therapy and 90 who received adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation (22%). In both unadjusted and multivariable analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation was not associated with a significant survival benefit compared to no adjuvant therapy. In a subgroup analysis of 335 patients without high risk features by NCCN criteria, adjuvant chemotherapy was not independently associated with a survival benefit.ConclusionIn this analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation was not associated with a significant survival benefit in completely resected, pathologically node-negative distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, independent of presence of high risk characteristics. The risks and benefits of adjuvant therapy should be weighed before offering it to patients with completely resected pT2-4aN0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.
| S-EPMC7502525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSurgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation is widely used to treat resectable pancreatic cancer. Although studies suggest initiation of adjuvant therapy within 12 weeks of surgery, there is no clear time interval associated with better survival.ObjectiveTo evaluate the ideal timing of adjuvant therapy for patients with stage I to II resected pancreatic cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included 7548 patients with stage I to II resected pancreatic cancer (5453 with adjuvant therapy; 2095 without adjuvant therapy) from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015. Data were collected from January 2014 to December 2015 and analyzed from December 2018 to May 2019.ExposuresAdjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation at various time intervals.Main outcomes and measuresOverall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 7548 patients (3770 male [49.9%]; median [interquartile range] age, 67 [59-74] years) were identified from the National Cancer Database. Among 5453 patients with adjuvant therapy, a Cox model with restricted cubic splines identified the lowest mortality risk when adjuvant therapy was started 28 to 59 days after surgery. Patients were divided into early (n = 269, adjuvant therapy initiated within <28 days), reference (n = 3048, adjuvant therapy initiated within 28-59 days), and late (n = 2136, adjuvant therapy initiated after >59 days) interval cohorts. Median (interquartile range) overall follow-up was 38.6 (24.6-62.0) months. Compared with the reference interval cohort on multivariable analysis, both the early cohort (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02-1.35; P = .03) and the late cohort (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.17; P = .008) were associated with worse mortality. Similarly, the reference interval cohort had improved OS compared with the early cohort in 268 propensity-matched pairs (2-year OS, 52.5% [95% CI, 46.7%-59.0%] vs 45.1% [95% CI, 39.5%-51.6%]; P = .02) and compared with the late cohort in 2042 propensity-matched pairs (2-year OS, 51.3% [95% CI, 49.1%-53.6%] vs 45.4% [95% CI, 43.3%-47.7%]; P = .01). Patients who received adjuvant therapy more than 12 weeks after surgery (n = 683) had improved OS compared with surgery alone in both multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66-0.85; P < .001) and 655 propensity-matched pairs (2-year OS, 47.2% [95% CI, 43.5%-51.3%] vs 38.0% [95% CI, 34.4%-42.0%]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevancePatients with stage I to II pancreatic cancer who commenced adjuvant therapy within 28 to 59 days after primary surgical resection had improved survival outcomes compared with those with adjuvant therapy before 28 days or after 59 days. Patients who recovered slowly from surgery still benefited from delayed adjuvant therapy initiated more than 12 weeks after surgery compared with patients who underwent surgery only.
| S-EPMC6694394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe performed a nationwide analysis to assess the impact of adjuvant therapy on survival after a microscopically margin-positive (R1) resection for esophageal cancer.MethodsThe National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with R1 resection for esophageal cancer (2004-2015). Patients were grouped by type of adjuvant therapy. Patients who had other margin status, M1 disease, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation, missing survival, and no or unknown treatment were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival. A 1:1 propensity score-matched sensitivity analysis was also performed comparing patients who received no adjuvant therapy with those who received adjuvant chemoradiation.ResultsOf 546 patients, 279 (51%) received adjuvant therapy and 267 (49%) did not. Patients receiving adjuvant therapy were more likely to be younger, have more advanced pathologic stage, have nonsquamous histology, and have shorter hospitalization. In multivariable analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiation, and chemoradiation were all associated with improved survival compared with no adjuvant therapy. In a propensity score-matched analysis of 123 patient pairs, adjuvant chemoradiation was associated with improved survival compared with no adjuvant therapy (adjusted HR: 0.30; 95% CI: [0.22, 0.40]).ConclusionsAdjuvant therapy is associated with improved survival compared with no adjuvant therapy in patients with R1 resection for esophageal cancer even after adjustment for pathologic stage. Adjuvant therapy should be considered in patients with incompletely resected esophageal cancer in concordance with national guidelines.
| S-EPMC7275192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal time to initiate adjuvant therapy (AT) in elderly patients with glioblastoma (GBM) remains unclear. We investigated the impact of timing to start AT on overall survival (OS) using two national-scale datasets covering elderly GBM populations in the United States. A total of 3159 and 8161 eligible elderly GBM patients were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked dataset (2004-2013) and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2004-2014), respectively. The intervals in days from the diagnosis to the initiation of AT were categorized based on two scenarios: Scenario I (quartiles), ≤ 15, 16-26, 27-37, and ≥ 38 days; Scenario II (median), < 27, and ≥ 27 days. The primary outcome was OS. We performed the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression methods for survival analysis. A sensitivity analysis was performed using Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method to achieve well-balanced characteristics between early-timing and delayed-timing in Scenario II. Improved OS was observed among patients who underwent resection and initiated AT with either a modest delay (27-37 days) or a longer delay (≥ 38 days) compared to those who received AT immediately (≤ 15 days) from both the SEER-Medicare dataset [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.84, P < 0.001; and aHR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.92, P = 0.002] and the NCDB (aHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93, P = 0.001; and aHR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.98, P = 0.017). The survival advantage is observed in delayed-timing group as well in Scenario II. For elderly patients who had biopsy only, improved OS was only detected in a longer delay (Scenario I: ≥ 38 days vs. ≤ 15 days) or the delayed-timing group (Scenario II: ≥ 27 days vs. < 27 days) in the NCDB while no survival difference was seen in SEER-Medicare population. For the best timing to start AT in elderly GBM patients, superior survivals were observed among those who had craniotomy and initiated AT with a modest (27-37 days) or longer delays (≥ 38 days) following diagnosis using both the SEER-Medicare and NCDB datasets (Scenario I). Such survival advantage was confirmed when categorizing delayed-timing vs. early-timing with the cut-off at 27 day in both datasets (Scenario II). The increased likelihood of receiving delayed AT (≥ 27 days) was significantly associated with tumor resection (STR/GTR), years of diagnosis after 2006, African American and Hispanics races, treatments at academic facilities, and being referred. There is no difference in timing of AT on survival among elderly GBM patients who had biopsy in the SEER-Medicare dataset. In conclusion, initiating AT with a modest delay (27-37 days) or a longer delay (≥ 38 days) after craniotomy may be the preferred timing in the elderly GBM population.
| S-EPMC9968296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To determine if outpatient medications taken at the time of liver tumor embolization or ablation affect survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A retrospective review was done of 2,032 liver tumor embolization, radioembolization, and ablation procedures performed in 1,092 patients from June 2009 to April 2016. Pathology, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer), neuroendocrine tumor (NET) grade, initial locoregional therapy, overall survival after initial locoregional therapy, Child-Pugh score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and outpatient medications taken at the time of locoregional therapy were analyzed for each patient. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated for patients taking 29 medications or medication classes (including prescription and nonprescription medications) for reasons unrelated to their primary cancer diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS:For patients with HCC initially treated with embolization (n = 304 patients), the following medications were associated with improved survival when taken at the time of embolization: beta-blockers (P = .0007), aspirin (P = .0008) and other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (P = .009), proton pump inhibitors (P = .004), and antivirals for hepatitis B or C (P = .01). For colorectal liver metastases initially treated with ablation (n = 172 patients), beta-blockers were associated with improved survival when taken at the time of ablation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS:Aspirin and beta-blockers are associated with significantly improved survival when taken at the time of embolization for HCC. Aspirin was not associated with survival differences after locoregional therapy for NET or colorectal liver metastases, suggesting an HCC-specific effect.
| S-EPMC5502720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeDelays in initiating adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) are a cause for concern among women with breast cancer and clinicians, but the impact of delayed AET on overall survival (OS) is unclear. This study seeks to describe the relationship between delayed AET and OS.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of women with stage II and III hormone receptor positive, human epidermal receptor 2 negative, invasive breast cancer, identified from the National Cancer Database. The primary exposure delayed AET, was defined as initiation of AET more than 12 months after breast cancer diagnosis. Using logistic regression, we examined predictors of delayed AET. The survival analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics.ResultsAmong the 391,594 included women, 12,162 (3.1%) had delayed AET. Predictors of delayed AET included Black race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.52-1.70) or Hispanic ethnicity (aOR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.16-1.35) vs white race, Medicare (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.20) or Medicaid (aOR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.32-1.50) versus private insurance, and cancer stage III (aOR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.19-1.30) vs stage II. With median follow-up of 67.4 months, 67,335 (17.2%) patients died. Delayed AET had no statistically significant effect on the hazard of death (adjusted hazards ratio = 1.01; 95% CI 0.96-1.06) compared to initiation within 12 months of diagnosis.ConclusionThis study suggests that there may be no adverse impact on survival if initiation of AET occurs 12 to 24 months after initial diagnosis compared to within 12 months of diagnosis as currently recommended.
| S-EPMC7658028 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesDisparities in esophageal cancer are well-established. The standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer is chemoradiation followed by surgery. We sought to evaluate the association between socioeconomic factors, time to surgery, and patient outcomes.MethodsAll patients ≥18 years old diagnosed with T2/3/4 or node-positive esophageal cancer between 2004 and 2016 and who underwent chemoradiation and esophagectomy in the National Cancer Database were included. Multivariable regression was used to assess the association between socioeconomic variables and time to surgery (grouped into <56, 56-84, and 85-112 days).ResultsA total of 12 157 patients were included. Five-year overall survival was 39%, 35%, and 35% for the three groups examined. Postoperative 30- and 90-day mortality was increased in both the 56-84 days to surgery group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.30 and 1.20, respectively) and the 85-112 days group (OR: 1.37 and 1.56, respectively) when compared to <56 days. Patients of a minority race, public insurance, or lower income were more likely to have a longer time to surgery.ConclusionLonger time to surgery is associated with increased postoperative mortality and is more common in patients with lower socioeconomic status. Further research exploring reasons for delays to esophagectomy among disadvantaged patients could help target interventions to reduce disparities.
| S-EPMC10151060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of bisphosphonates (BP) in early breast cancer (BC) has been considered controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that appraised the effects of BP on survival in early BC.MethodsRCTs were identified by searching the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE databases and conference proceedings. Hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and relative risks of adverse events were estimated and pooled.ResultsThirteen trials met the inclusion criteria, evaluating a total of 15,762 patients. Meta-analysis of ten trials which reported OS revealed no statistically significant benefit in OS for BP (HR 0.89, 95% CI?=?0.79 to 1.01). Meta-analysis of nine trials which reported the DFS revealed no benefit in DFS (HR 0.95 (0.81-1.12)). Meta-analysis upon menopausal status showed a statistically significant better DFS in the BP-treated patients (HR 0.81(0.69-0.95)). In meta-regression, chemotherapy was negatively associated with HR of survival.ConclusionsOur meta-analysis indicates a positive effect for adjuvant BP on survival only in postmenopausal patients. Meta-regression demonstrated a negative association between chemotherapy use BP effect on survival. Further large scale RCTs are warranted to unravel the specific subgroups that would benefit from the addition of BP in the adjuvant setting.
| S-EPMC3753308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeRadioactive iodine (RAI) is widely used for adjuvant therapy after thyroidectomy, while its value for thyroid cancer has been controversial recently. The primary objectives of this study were to clarify the influence of Radioactive iodine (RAI) on the survival in rare oxyphilic subtype of thyroid cancer (Hürthle cell carcinoma, HCC).MethodsPatients diagnosed with oxyphilic thyroid carcinoma from 2004 to 2015 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) among patients who had adjuvant RAI use or not. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed for survival analysis, and subsequently visualized by nomogram.ResultsIn all, 2,799 patients were identified, of which 1529 patients had adjuvant RAI use while 1,270 patients had not. Based on multivariate Cox analysis, the RAI therapy confers an improved OS for HCC patients (HR = 0.57, 95% CI [0.44-0.72], P < 0.001), whereas it has no significant benefit in the survival analysis regarding CSS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI [[0.47-1.34], P = 0.382). In a subgroup analysis, the same survival benefit of RAI treatment on OS, but not CSS was observed among patients stratified by AJCC stage and tumor extension. Nevertheless, patients with regional lymph node metastasis benefited from RAI therapy both in OS and CSS (P < 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, nomograms used for predicting long term survival of HCC patients exhibited a better prediction power for OS compared with traditional tumor, nodal and metastatic (TNM) stage made by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) (C-index = 0.833 of the nomogram model vs. 0.696 of the AJCC system).ConclusionsThis study suggests that RAI therapy is significantly associated with improved OS in patients with Hürthle cell carcinoma. However, there was no association between treatment with radioiodine and CSS, possibly due to small number of deaths that were related to HCC.
| S-EPMC6716497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOn the basis of data from a phase 2 trial that compared the checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab at doses of 0.3 mg, 3 mg, and 10 mg per kilogram of body weight in patients with advanced melanoma, this phase 3 trial evaluated ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram in patients who had undergone complete resection of stage III melanoma.MethodsAfter patients had undergone complete resection of stage III cutaneous melanoma, we randomly assigned them to receive ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram (475 patients) or placebo (476) every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years or until disease recurrence or an unacceptable level of toxic effects occurred. Recurrence-free survival was the primary end point. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and safety.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the 5-year rate of recurrence-free survival was 40.8% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 30.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; P<0.001). The rate of overall survival at 5 years was 65.4% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 54.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.72; 95.1% CI, 0.58 to 0.88; P=0.001). The rate of distant metastasis-free survival at 5 years was 48.3% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 38.9% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death or distant metastasis, 0.76; 95.8% CI, 0.64 to 0.92; P=0.002). Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 54.1% of the patients in the ipilimumab group and in 26.2% of those in the placebo group. Immune-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 41.6% of the patients in the ipilimumab group and in 2.7% of those in the placebo group. In the ipilimumab group, 5 patients (1.1%) died owing to immune-related adverse events.ConclusionsAs adjuvant therapy for high-risk stage III melanoma, ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram resulted in significantly higher rates of recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and distant metastasis-free survival than placebo. There were more immune-related adverse events with ipilimumab than with placebo. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00636168 , and EudraCT number, 2007-001974-10 .).
| S-EPMC5648545 | biostudies-literature