Dataset Information

Treatment and clinical outcome of clinical T4 esophageal cancer: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background:Survival of patients with cT4 esophageal cancer is dismal. Although the optimal treatment strategy remains to be established, two treatment options are available for cT4 esophageal cancers: definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) and induction treatment followed by conversion surgery (CS). However, little is known concerning the differences in clinical outcome between patients with T4 esophageal tumors treated with dCRT and those eventually treated with CS. Methods:A systematic search of the scientific literature on PubMed/MEDLINE was carried out using the keywords "T4 esophageal cancer," "invading (involving) adjacent organ," "definitive chemoradiation," "induction therapy," "salvage surgery," and "conversion surgery," obtaining 28 reports published up to July 2018. Results/Conclusion:We found that CS was superior to dCRT with respect to local disease control and short-term survival; however, CS was associated with relatively higher perioperative mortality and morbidity. Alternatively, although dCRT might often cause fistula formation, a clinical complete response to dCRT is likely to lead to a better prognosis. Recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents have led to triple induction chemotherapy, with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF), which has shown promise as an initial induction treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer. Indeed, this regimen could control both local and systemic disease, which enables curative resection without preoperative CRT. Moreover, some appropriate changes in perioperative management and intensive systemic chemotherapy might enhance patient outcome. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size are needed to establish the standard treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer.

SUBMITTER: Makino T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6422802 | biostudies-other | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Treatment and clinical outcome of clinical T4 esophageal cancer: A systematic review.

Makino Tomoki T Yamasaki Makoto M Tanaka Koji K Miyazaki Yasuhiro Y Takahashi Tsuyoshi T Kurokawa Yukinori Y Motoori Masaaki M Kimura Yutaka Y Nakajima Kiyokazu K Mori Masaki M Doki Yuichiro Y

Annals of gastroenterological surgery 20181213 2

<h4>Background</h4>Survival of patients with cT4 esophageal cancer is dismal. Although the optimal treatment strategy remains to be established, two treatment options are available for cT4 esophageal cancers: definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) and induction treatment followed by conversion surgery (CS). However, little is known concerning the differences in clinical outcome between patients with T4 esophageal tumors treated with dCRT and those eventually treated with CS.<h4>Methods</h4>A systemati ...[more]

PMID: 30923786

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) continue to provide the best evidence for treatment options, but the quality of reporting in RCTs and the completeness rate of reporting of surgical outcomes and complication data vary widely. The aim of this study was to measure the quality of reporting of the surgical outcome and complication data in RCTs of rectal cancer treatment and whether this quality has changed over time.MethodsEligible articles with the keywords ("rectal cancer" OR "rectal carcinoma") AND ("radiation" OR "radiotherapy") that were RCTs and published in the English, German, Polish, or Italian language were identified by reviewing all abstracts published from 1982 through 2022. Two authors independently screened and analysed all studies. The quality of the surgical outcome and complication data was assessed based on fourteen criteria, and the quality of RCTs was evaluated based on a modified Jadad scale. The primary outcome was the quality of reporting in RCTs and the completeness rate of reporting of surgical results and complication data.ResultsA total of 340 articles reporting multimodal therapy outcomes for 143,576 rectal cancer patients were analysed. A total of 7 articles (2%) met all 14 reporting criteria, 13 met 13 criteria, 27 met from 11 to 12 criteria, 36 met from 9 to 10 criteria, 76 met from 7 to 8 criteria, and most articles met fewer than 7 criteria (mean 5.5 criteria). Commonly underreported criteria included complication severity (15% of articles), macroscopic integrity of mesorectal excision (17% of articles), length of stay (18% of articles), number of lymph nodes (21% of articles), distance between the tumour and circumferential resection margin (CRM) (26% of articles), surgical radicality according to the site of the primary tumour (R0 vs. R1 + R2) (29% of articles), and CRM status (38% of articles).ConclusionInconsistent surgical outcome and complication data reporting in multimodal rectal cancer treatment RCTs is standard. Standardised reporting of clinical and oncological outcomes should be established to facilitate comparing studies and results of related research topics.

Project description:Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of Javanica oil emulsion injection (JOEI) combined with the radiotherapy (RT) for treating esophageal cancer (EC). Design: A literature search was conducted for collecting the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on EC treated by JOEI in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (SinoMed), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, the China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and the Wanfang Database from inception to February 4, 2017. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool, and objective remission rate, performance status, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 1-year survival rate, and 2-year survival rate were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 13.0 software. Results: A total of 11 RCTs with 909 participants were involved in this meta-analysis. The results showed that in comparison with RT alone, the JOEI combined with RT was associated with the better effects on improving objective remission rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.17-1.52], Z = 4.44, p < 0.00001), performance status (RR = 1.52, 95% CI [1.25-1.85], Z = 4.24, p < 0.00001), 1-year survival rate (RR = 1.37, 95% CI [1.17-1.60], Z = 3.86, p < 0.0001), and 2-year survival rate (RR = 1.36, 95% CI [1.09-1.70], Z = 2.68, p = 0.007). The differences between the two groups in objective remission rate, performance status, 1-year survival rate, and 2-year survival rate were statistically significant. Besides, the JOEI combined with RT could reduce the incidence of ADRs. Specifically, the statistically significant difference was detected between these two groups about leukopenia (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.25-0.61], Z = 4.19, p < 0.0001), radiation esophagitis (RR = 0.68, 95% CI [0.50-0.93], Z = 2.42, p = 0.02), thrombocytopenia (RR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.12-0.66], Z = 2.95, p = 0.003), and hemoglobin reduction (RR = 0.53, 95% CI [0.35-0.79], Z = 3.14, p = 0.002); however, there was no statistically significant difference for the outcome of nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.61, 95% CI [0.36-1.03], Z = 1.85, p = 0.06) between two groups. Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicated that the combination of JOEI and RT was associated with the more beneficial treatment for patients with EC compared with only receiving RT. However, more well-designed and multicenter RCTs should be carried out to confirm this finding because of the limitations of enrolled 11 RCTs.

Dataset Information

Treatment and clinical outcome of clinical T4 esophageal cancer: A systematic review.

Publications

Treatment and clinical outcome of clinical T4 esophageal cancer: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets