Dataset Information

Esophageal motion characteristics in thoracic esophageal cancer: Impact of clinical stage T4 versus stages T1-T3.

ABSTRACT: The main purpose was to investigate the differences of the esophageal motion (EM) and the internal target volume (ITV) margins for the esophagus between clinical T1-T3 (cT1-T3) and cT4 cases, using 4-dimensional computed tomography. A secondary purpose was to assess the metastatic lymph nodal motion (NM) and the ITV margins for lymph nodes (LNs) using the datasets of patients with nodal involvement pathologically defined.We analyzed patients with thoracic esophageal cancer consecutively treated with definitive chemoradiation, measuring the EM and the ITV margins in the left-right, anteroposterior, and superoinferior directions. All esophageal contours were divided at the carina. The EM and NM were measured from the displacement of the centroid point between 0% images (at the end of inhalation) and 50% images (at the end of exhalation). The ITV margins were defined as the maximum distance in each direction from the clinical target volume at the 4-dimensional computed tomography average images to the intersection of the clinical target volume at the 0% and 50% images of complete coverage in each patient.The EM below the carina in cT4 was significantly smaller than that in cT1-T2 in all directions (P < .01) and than that in cT3 in all directions (left-right: P = .03, anteroposterior and superoinferior: P < .01). The EM in the case of a cT4 tumor located below the carina was smaller than that in the case of cT4 tumor located above the carina. The NM of abdominal-LNs was much larger than that of cervicothoracic-LNs and the EM below the carina. These tendencies were similar in the ITV measurements.The EM and the ITV margins in cT4 were significantly smaller than those in cT1-T3. The NM and the ITV margins of abdominal LNs were much larger than those of cervicothoracic LNs and the esophagus. In clinical radiation therapy planning for esophageal cancer, we should take cT stage into consideration.

SUBMITTER: Kobayashi Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5514169 | biostudies-other | 2016 Oct-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Although the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines include clear recommendations for the appropriate resection margins in non-acral cutaneous melanoma, the required margin for acral melanoma is controversial. In this retrospective study, we aimed to investigate whether narrow-margin excision is warranted for thick acral melanoma. Records from 277 melanoma patients with stage T3-T4 disease who underwent radical surgery in three centers in China from September 2010 to October 2018 were reviewed. Clinicopathologic data, including age, gender, excision margin (1-2 cm versus ≥ 2 cm), Clark level, Breslow thickness, ulceration, N stage and adjuvant therapy, were included for survival analysis. The patients were followed up until death or March 31, 2021. Log-rank and Cox regression analyses were used to identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local and in-transit recurrence-free survival (LITRFS). Among all enrolled patients, 207 (74.7%) had acral melanoma, and 70 (25.3%) had non-acral cutaneous melanoma. No significant difference in baseline characteristics was identified between non-acral and acral melanoma, except for age (p = 0.004), gender (p = 0.009) and ulceration (p = 0.048). In non-acral melanoma, a resection margin of 1-2 cm was a poor independent prognostic factor for OS [p = 0.015; hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI), 0.26 (0.009-0.77)] and LITRFS [p = 0.013; HR (95% CI), 0.19 (0.05-0.71)] but not for DFS [p = 0.143; HR (95% CI), 0.51 (0.21-1.25)]. Forty-three (20.8%) patients in the acral melanoma group had a 1-2-cm resection margin. The resection margin was not correlated with patients' OS (p = 0.196 by log-rank analysis, p = 0.865 by multivariate survival analysis), DFS (p = 0.080 by log-rank analysis, p = 0.758 by multivariate survival analysis) or LITRFS (p = 0.354 by log-rank analysis) in acral melanoma. As recommended in the NCCN guidelines, a resection margin ≥ 2 cm is required for non-acral cutaneous melanoma. Meanwhile, a narrow resection margin (1-2 cm) may be safe for patients with acral melanoma.

Project description:BackgroundData suggest symptoms of hypothyroidism persist in 5-10% of levothyroxine (L-T4)-treated hypothyroid patients with normal serum thyrotrophin (TSH). The use of L-T4 + liothyronine (L-T3) combination therapy in such patients is controversial. The ETA nominated a task force to review the topic and formulate guidelines in this area.MethodsTask force members developed a list of relevant topics. Recommendations on each topic are based on a systematic literature search, discussions within the task force, and comments from the European Thyroid Association (ETA) membership at large.ResultsSUGGESTED EXPLANATIONS FOR PERSISTING SYMPTOMS INCLUDE: awareness of a chronic disease, presence of associated autoimmune diseases, thyroid autoimmunity per se, and inadequacy of L-T4 treatment to restore physiological thyroxine (T4) and triiodothyronine (T3) concentrations in serum and tissues. There is insufficient evidence that L-T4 + L-T3 combination therapy is better than L-T4 monotherapy, and it is recommended that L-T4 monotherapy remains the standard treatment of hypothyroidism. L-T4 + L-T3 combination therapy might be considered as an experimental approach in compliant L-T4-treated hypothyroid patients who have persistent complaints despite serum TSH values within the reference range, provided they have previously received support to deal with the chronic nature of their disease, and associated autoimmune diseases have been excluded. Treatment should only be instituted by accredited internists/endocrinologists, and discontinued if no improvement is experienced after 3 months. It is suggested to start combination therapy in an L-T4/L-T3 dose ratio between 13:1 and 20:1 by weight (L-T4 once daily, and the daily L-T3 dose in two doses). Currently available combined preparations all have an L-T4/L-T3 dose ratio of less than 13:1, and are not recommended. Close monitoring is indicated, aiming not only to normalize serum TSH and free T4 but also normal serum free T4/free T3 ratios. Suggestions are made for further research.ConclusionL-T4 + L-T3 combination therapy should be considered solely as an experimental treatment modality. The present guidelines are offered to enhance its safety and to counter its indiscriminate use.

Project description:BackgroundLeft thoracic approach (LTA) has been a favorable selection in surgical treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China before minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is popular. This study aimed to demonstrate whether right thoracic approach (RTA) is superior to LTA in the surgical treatment of middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC).MethodsSuperiority clinical trial design was used for this multicenter randomized controlled two-parallel group study. Between April 2015 and December 2018, cT1b-3N0-1M0 TESCC patients from 14 centers were recruited and randomized by a central stratified block randomization program into LTA or RTA groups. All enrolled patients were followed up every three months after surgery. The software SPSS 20.0 and R 3.6.2. were used for statistical analysis. Efficacy and safety outcomes, 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test.ResultsA total of 861 patients without suspected upper mediastinal lymph nodes (umLN) were finally enrolled in the study after 95 ineligible patients were excluded. 833 cases (98.7%) were successfully followed up until June 1, 2020. Esophagectomies were performed via LTA in 453 cases, and via RTA in 408 cases. Compared with the LTA group, the RTA group required longer operating time (274.48±78.92 vs. 205.34±51.47 min, P<0.001); had more complications (33.8% vs. 26.3% P=0.016); harvested more lymph nodes (LNs) (23.61±10.09 vs. 21.92±10.26, P=0.015); achieved a significantly improved OS in stage IIIa patients (67.8% vs. 51.8%, P=0.022). The 3-year OS and DFS were 68.7% and 64.3% in LTA arm versus 71.3% and 63.7% in RTA arm (P=0.20; P=0.96).ConclusionsEsophagectomies via both LTA and RTA can achieve similar outcomes in middle or lower TESCC patients without suspected umLN. RTA is superior to LTA and recommended for the surgical treatment of more advanced stage TESCC due to more complete lymphadenectomy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02448979.

Dataset Information

Esophageal motion characteristics in thoracic esophageal cancer: Impact of clinical stage T4 versus stages T1-T3.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets