Dataset Information

Adjuvant Therapy for Positive Nodes After Induction Therapy and Resection of Esophageal Cancer.

ABSTRACT: The value of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with positive lymph nodes (+LNs) after induction therapy and resection of esophageal cancer is controversial. This study assesses survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this cohort.We analyzed our single-institution database for patients with +LNs after induction therapy and resection of primary esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2013. Factors associated with survival were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model.A total of 101 of 764 esophagectomy patients received induction and had +LNs on final pathologic examination. Forty-five also received adjuvant therapy: 37 of 45 (82%) received chemotherapy alone, 1 of 45 (2%) received radiation alone, and 7 of 45 (16%) received both. Pathologic stage was IIB in 21 (47%), IIIA in 19 (42%), and IIIB in 5 (11%). In 56 node-positive patients with induction but not adjuvant therapy, pathologic stage was IIB in 28 (50%), IIIA in 18 (32%), IIIB in 7 (13%), and IIIC in 3 (5%). Neither age nor comorbidity score differed between cohorts. Adjuvant patients experienced a shorter hospital length of stay (mean, 10 days [range, 6 to 33 days] versus 11 days [range, 7 to 67 days]; p = 0.03]. Median survival favored the adjuvant group: 24.0 months (95% confidence interval, 16.6 to 32.2 months) versus 18.0 months (95% confidence interval, 11.1 to 25.0 months); p = 0.033). Multivariate Cox regression identified adjuvant therapy, length of stay, and number of +LNs as influential for survival.Optimal management of node-positive patients after induction therapy and esophagectomy remains unclear, but in this series, adjuvant therapy, length of stay, and number of +LNs impacted survival. A prospective trial may reduce potential bias and guide the evaluation of adjuvant therapy in this patient population.

SUBMITTER: Brescia AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4745588 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adjuvant Therapy for Positive Nodes After Induction Therapy and Resection of Esophageal Cancer.

Brescia Alexander A AA Broderick Stephen R SR Crabtree Traves D TD Puri Varun V Musick Joanne F JF Bell Jennifer M JM Kreisel Daniel D Krupnick A Sasha AS Patterson G Alexander GA Meyers Bryan F BF

The Annals of thoracic surgery 20151024 1

<h4>Background</h4>The value of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with positive lymph nodes (+LNs) after induction therapy and resection of esophageal cancer is controversial. This study assesses survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this cohort.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed our single-institution database for patients with +LNs after induction therapy and resection of primary esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2013. Factors associated with survival were analyzed using a Cox proportional h ...[more]

PMID: 26507424

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Wide variation is seen in the dosage of preoperative induction radiation therapy for esophageal cancer. We investigated associations between outcomes after esophagectomy and dosage of induction radiation therapy. METHODS:Patients undergoing induction radiation therapy (30 to 70 Gy), followed by esophagectomy, were identified from the National Cancer Database and classified as low (<40 Gy), standard (40 to 50.4 Gy), and high dose (>50.4 Gy). Perioperative outcomes and overall survival were compared. Subgroup analysis compared two common dosages: 45 Gy and 50.4 Gy. RESULTS:From 2004 to 2014, 10,738 patients (84.7%) received standard-dose radiation, increasing from 69.7% in 2004 to 93.6% in 2014 (p < 0.001), 1,329 (10.5%) received low-dose radiation, and 608 (4.8%) received high-dose radiation. Higher rates of pathologic complete response (pCR; low: 11.7%, standard: 16.2%, high: 21.0%; p < 0.001) and downstaging (low: 52.0%, standard: 56.4%, high: 63.1%, p = 0.001) were observed as the dosage increased. On multivariable analysis, compared with standard-dose, high-dose radiation was associated with higher 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.11; p < 0.001) without a higher likelihood of downstaging or pCR. Low-dose radiation was associated with lower likelihood of downstaging (OR, 0.85; p = 0.04) and pCR (OR, 0.67; p < 0.001) without lowering the risk of 30-day mortality. The dose of 50.4 Gy was associated with higher likelihood of pCR (OR, 1.12; p = 0.04), without affecting 30-day mortality, compared with 45 Gy. CONCLUSIONS:High-dose induction radiation (>50.4 Gy) is associated with increased perioperative death after esophagectomy, without a significant improvement in tumor response. Low-dose radiation (<30 Gy) is associated with worse tumor response without a lower risk of perioperative death. Within standard dosages, 50.4 Gy is associated with higher likelihood of pCR without adversely affecting perioperative mortality compared with 45 Gy.

Project description:BackgroundCarcinoma of the esophagus is an aggressive malignancy with an increasing incidence. Its virulence, in terms of symptoms and mortality, justifies a continued search for optimal therapy. The large and growing number of patients affected, the high mortality rates, the worldwide geographic variation in practice, and the large body of good quality research warrants a systematic review with meta-analysis.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the impact of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy on resectable thoracic esophageal cancer to inform evidence-based practice was produced.MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology were searched for trial reports. Included were randomized trials or meta-analyses of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatments compared with surgery alone or other treatments in patients with resectable thoracic esophageal cancer. Outcomes of interest were survival, adverse effects, and quality of life. Either one- or three-year mortality data were pooled and reported as relative risk ratios.ResultsThirty-four randomized controlled trials and six meta-analyses were obtained and grouped into 13 basic treatment approaches. Single randomized controlled trials detected no differences in mortality between treatments for the following comparisons:- Preoperative radiotherapy versus postoperative radiotherapy.- Preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy versus postoperative radiotherapy. Preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy was associated with a significantly higher mortality rate.- Postoperative chemotherapy versus postoperative radiotherapy.- Postoperative radiotherapy versus postoperative radiotherapy plus protein-bound polysaccharide versus chemoradiation versus chemoradiation plus protein-bound polysaccharide. Pooling one-year mortality detected no statistically significant differences in mortality between treatments for the following comparisons:- Preoperative radiotherapy compared with surgery alone (five randomized trials).- Postoperative radiotherapy compared with surgery alone (five randomized trials).- Preoperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone (six randomized trials).- Preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone (two randomized trials).- Preoperative chemoradiation therapy versus surgery alone (six randomized trials). Single randomized controlled trials detected differences in mortality between treatments for the following comparison:- Preoperative hyperthermia and chemoradiotherapy versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy in favour of hyperthermia. Pooling three-year mortality detected no statistically significant difference in mortality between treatments for the following comparison:- Postoperative chemotherapy compared with surgery alone (two randomized trials). Pooling three-year mortality detected statistically significant differences between treatments for the following comparisons:- Preoperative chemoradiation therapy versus surgery alone (six randomized trials) in favour of preoperative chemoradiation with surgery.- Preoperative chemotherapy compared with preoperative radiotherapy (one randomized trial) in favour of preoperative radiotherapy.ConclusionFor adult patients with resectable thoracic esophageal cancer for whom surgery is considered appropriate, surgery alone (i.e., without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy) is recommended as the standard practice.

Project description:IntroductionACOSOG-Z0011(Z11) trial showed that axillary node clearance (ANC) may be omitted in women with ≤2 positive nodes undergoing breast conserving surgery (BCS) and whole breast radiotherapy (RT). A confirmatory study is needed to clarify the role of axillary treatment in women with ≤2 macrometastases undergoing BCS and groups that were not included in Z11 for example, mastectomy and those with microscopic extranodal invasion. The primary objective of POsitive Sentinel NOde: adjuvant therapy alone versus adjuvant therapy plus Clearance or axillary radiotherapy (POSNOC) is to evaluate whether for women with breast cancer and 1 or 2 macrometastases, adjuvant therapy alone is non-inferior to adjuvant therapy plus axillary treatment, in terms of 5-year axillary recurrence.Methods and analysisPOSNOC is a pragmatic, multicentre, non-inferiority, international trial with participants randomised in a 1:1 ratio. Women are eligible if they have T1/T2, unifocal or multifocal invasive breast cancer, and 1 or 2 macrometastases at sentinel node biopsy, with or without extranodal extension. In the intervention group women receive adjuvant therapy alone, in the standard care group they receive ANC or axillary RT. In both groups women receive adjuvant therapy, according to local guidelines. This includes systemic therapy and, if indicated, RT to breast or chest wall. The UK Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group manages the in-built radiotherapy quality assurance programme. Primary endpoint is 5-year axillary recurrence. Secondary outcomes are arm morbidity assessed by Lymphoedema and Breast Cancer Questionnaire and QuickDASH questionnaires; quality of life and anxiety as assessed with FACT B+4 and State/Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaires, respectively; other oncological outcomes; economic evaluation using EQ-5D-5L. Target sample size is 1900. Primary analysis is per protocol. Recruitment started on 1 August 2014 and as of 9 June 2021, 1866 participants have been randomised.Ethics and disseminationProtocol was approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee East Midlands-Nottingham 2 (REC reference: 13/EM/0459). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberISRCTN54765244; NCT0240168Cite Now.

Project description:Women with node-positive vulvar cancer have a high risk for disease recurrence. Indication criteria for adjuvant radiotherapy are controversial. This study was designed to further understand the role of adjuvant therapy in node-positive disease.Patients with primary squamous-cell vulvar cancer treated at 29 gynecologic cancer centers in Germany from 1998 through 2008 were included in this retrospective exploratory multicenter cohort study. Of 1618 documented patients, 1249 had surgical groin staging and known lymph node status and were further analyzed. All statistical tests were two-sided.Four hundred forty-seven of 1249 patients (35.8%) had lymph node metastases (N+). The majority of N+ patients had one (172 [38.5%]) or two (102 [22.8%]) positive nodes. The three-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate of N+ patients was 35.2%, and the overall survival (OS) rate 56.2% compared with 75.2% and 90.2% in node-negative patients (N-). Two hundred forty-four (54.6%) N+ patients had adjuvant therapy, of which 183 (40.9%) had radiotherapy directed at the groins (+/-other fields). Three-year PFS and OS rates in these patients were better compared with N+ patients without adjuvant treatment (PFS: 39.6% vs 25.9%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI[= 0.51 to 0.88, P = .004; OS: 57.7% vs 51.4%, HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.56 to 1.11, P = .17). This effect was statistically significant in multivariable analysis adjusted for age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Union internationale contre le cancer stage, grade, invasion depth, and number of positive nodes (PFS: HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.78, P < .001; OS: HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.91, P = .01).This large multicenter study in vulvar cancer observed that adjuvant radiotherapy was associated with improved prognosis in node-positive patients and will hopefully help to overcome concerns regarding adjuvant treatment. However, outcome after adjuvant radiotherapy remains poor compared with node-negative patients. Adjuvant chemoradiation could be a possible strategy to improve therapy because it is superior to radiotherapy alone in other squamous cell carcinomas.

Dataset Information

Adjuvant Therapy for Positive Nodes After Induction Therapy and Resection of Esophageal Cancer.

Publications

Adjuvant Therapy for Positive Nodes After Induction Therapy and Resection of Esophageal Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets