BACKGROUND: Approximately 25 per cent of patients with oesophageal cancer who undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have no evidence of tumour in the resected specimen (complete pathological response). Those who do not respond have a poor 5-year survival compared with complete responders, regardless of whether or not they undergo surgery. Selecting for surgery only those who have a response to neoadjuvant therapy has the potential to improve overall survival as well as to rationalize the management of non-responders. This study assessed the accuracy of oesophagogastroscopy in this setting. METHODS: A prospective database of 804 patients undergoing oesophageal resection for carcinoma was reviewed. Endoscopic assessment of the response to neoadjuvant therapy in 100 consecutive patients was compared with the pathological assessment of response. The survival for each level of response was compared. RESULTS: At endoscopy 30 patients were considered to have had a complete response. This was confirmed pathologically in 15 patients. Survival was improved in those with a pathologically confirmed complete response (3-year survival rate 62.4 (s.e. 12.9) per cent) compared with non-responders (16.3 (s.e. 6.6) per cent). Those with microscopic residual disease also had an improved 3-year survival rate (46.3 (s.e. 12.2) per cent); however, oesophagogastroscopy failed to identify this subset. CONCLUSION: Oesophagogastroscopy may be useful in the assessment of tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, owing to its poor accuracy patients should not be excluded from further therapeutic intervention on the basis of this assessment alone. Copyright 2003 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
BACKGROUND: Approximately 25 per cent of patients with oesophageal cancer who undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have no evidence of tumour in the resected specimen (complete pathological response). Those who do not respond have a poor 5-year survival compared with complete responders, regardless of whether or not they undergo surgery. Selecting for surgery only those who have a response to neoadjuvant therapy has the potential to improve overall survival as well as to rationalize the management of non-responders. This study assessed the accuracy of oesophagogastroscopy in this setting. METHODS: A prospective database of 804 patients undergoing oesophageal resection for carcinoma was reviewed. Endoscopic assessment of the response to neoadjuvant therapy in 100 consecutive patients was compared with the pathological assessment of response. The survival for each level of response was compared. RESULTS: At endoscopy 30 patients were considered to have had a complete response. This was confirmed pathologically in 15 patients. Survival was improved in those with a pathologically confirmed complete response (3-year survival rate 62.4 (s.e. 12.9) per cent) compared with non-responders (16.3 (s.e. 6.6) per cent). Those with microscopic residual disease also had an improved 3-year survival rate (46.3 (s.e. 12.2) per cent); however, oesophagogastroscopy failed to identify this subset. CONCLUSION: Oesophagogastroscopy may be useful in the assessment of tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, owing to its poor accuracy patients should not be excluded from further therapeutic intervention on the basis of this assessment alone. Copyright 2003 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Paul M Schneider; Stephan E Baldus; Ralf Metzger; Martin Kocher; Rudolf Bongartz; Elfriede Bollschweiler; Hartmut Schaefer; Juergen Thiele; Hans P Dienes; Rolf P Mueller; Arnulf H Hoelscher Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Cuong P Duong; Rodney J Hicks; Leann Weih; Elizabeth Drummond; Trevor Leong; Michael Michael; Robert J S Thomas Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-03-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: T Conroy; Y Yataghène; P L Etienne; P Michel; H Senellart; J L Raoul; L Mineur; M Rives; X Mirabel; B Lamezec; E Rio; E Le Prisé; D Peiffert; A Adenis Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-10-12 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Christopher N Hurt; Lisette S Nixon; Gareth O Griffiths; Ruby Al-Mokhtar; Simon Gollins; John N Staffurth; Ceri J Phillips; Jane M Blazeby; Tom D Crosby Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: E van Meerten; K Muller; H W Tilanus; P D Siersema; W M H Eijkenboom; H van Dekken; T C K Tran; A van der Gaast Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-05-22 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: N Starling; A Okines; D Cunningham; W Allum; A Wotherspoon; M Benson; J Thompson; J Thomas; G Brown; A Riddell; F Stavridi; S Ashley; J Oates; I Chau Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 7.640