Dataset Information

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without neoadjuvant radiotherapy compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

ABSTRACT: Although it was controversial for treating locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACR) was more widely accepted rather than neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) worldwide. With the development of paclitaxel, a high response rate to NAC was reported in many studies. Our hypothesis is that lots of patients could get a response from NAC alone and avoid unnecessary NACR. Those who had no response from NAC could still response from the followed radiotherapy. We attempted to circumvent the controversy over the use of NAC, NACR and made a combined version, NAC ± neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NAR).The retrospective study compared NAC ± NAR with NACR between June 30, 2015 and October 31, 2016. Sixty consecutive borderline resectable ESCC were included: thirty-one in NAC ± NAR group and 29 in NACR group. The toxicities, response rates, operative data, complications, length of stay, and overall survival (OS) rates were evaluated.The response rate to NAC ± NAR was 93.5%; to NACR was 86.2%. There was no grade 3-4 non-hematologic adverse events after NAC ± NAR, but three in the NACR group. Arrhythmias (6.5% vs. 37.9%, P=0.003), pneumonitis (25.8% vs. 51.7%, P=0.039) and anastomotic leakage (0% vs. 13.8%, P=0.049) were more likely in NACR group. Postoperative hospitalization stays were significantly prolonged in the NACR (9 vs. 16 d, P<0.001). A point estimate of the 2-year OS rate of the NAC ± NAR group was 84.0%, the NACR group 80.7% (P=0.410).Compared with NACR, the NAC ± NACR provided the same survival benefits but low post operation complication rate. In the future, it might be a choice for locally advanced ESCC.

SUBMITTER: Zheng Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6129884 | biostudies-other | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without neoadjuvant radiotherapy compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Zheng Yan Y Liu Xianben X Zhang Ruixiang R Wang Zongfei Z Sun Haibo H Qin Jianjun J Liu Shilei S Li Yin Y

Journal of thoracic disease 20180801 8

<h4>Background</h4>Although it was controversial for treating locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACR) was more widely accepted rather than neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) worldwide. With the development of paclitaxel, a high response rate to NAC was reported in many studies. Our hypothesis is that lots of patients could get a response from NAC alone and avoid unnecessary NACR. Those who had no response from NAC could still respon ...[more]

PMID: 30233843

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe 5-year survival rate of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer is still low after neoadjuvant therapy plus esophagectomy, and additional adjuvant treatment may be required. Some studies have shown that patients can still benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) despite its toxic and side effects. This study was designed to explore which patients could benefit from AC.MethodsA retrospective cohort study based on patients who received neoadjuvant therapy plus esophagectomy with complete survival information between December 2014 and November 2020 was conducted. The inclusion criteria were as follows: esophageal cancer was diagnosed by pathological biopsy; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; R0 resection. The exclusion criteria were as follows: neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy or immunotherapy; adjuvant radiotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, immunotherapy, or targeted therapy; dead within 90 days of surgery; nonradical (R1/R2) resection; one cycle of postoperative chemotherapy. Patients were divided into AC group (AC) and non-AC group [AC(-)] according to whether AC was performed. We obtained the tumor recurrence and survival status of the patients through inpatient medical records, outpatient electronic medical records, and telephone follow-up of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were investigated as the outcome measures via Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox analyses.ResultsIn total, 318 patients were enrolled, among which 214 patients received AC while the other 104 patients did not [AC(-)]. There were significant differences in age and lymph nodes dissected between patients who received AC and those who did not receive AC (P<0.05). Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method, and in the overall group and subgroup, AC was beneficial for OS but not for RFS. In the overall group, sex (P=0.027) and age (P=0.027) were independent prognostic factors for OS. Subgroup multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that age (P=0.026) and AC (P=0.023) were independent prognostic factors for patients.ConclusionsFor patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who have residual disease after surgery, adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery may be a better treatment.

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.

Dataset Information

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without neoadjuvant radiotherapy compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Publications

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without neoadjuvant radiotherapy compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets