BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has the strongest antitumor effect against local tumors of esophageal cancer; however, no standard strategy has yet been established to achieve a clinical complete response (CR) after CRT. The aim of this study was to clarify when a decision can be made to perform further treatment for a clinical CR. METHODS: We evaluated 78 patients that underwent an esophagectomy after neoadjuvant CRT in our department between 1998 and 2007. The study investigated the clinical and pathologic results of neoadjuvant CRT. RESULTS: Of the 78 cases, 19 (24.3%) were a pathologic CR (Grade 3). Pathologic CR could be estimated in only 3 of 8 clinical CR cases (37.5%). On the other hand, 12 (20.7%) of the 58 clinical partial response (PR) cases achieved pathologic CR. Likewise, 4 cases (36.4%) achieved pathologic CR among the clinical no change/progressive disease (NC/PD) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical evaluation for CRT does not reflect the pathologic effectiveness and, even if clinical CR was achieved, viable cancer cells were still present at the primary site in the majority of the population.
BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has the strongest antitumor effect against local tumors of esophageal cancer; however, no standard strategy has yet been established to achieve a clinical complete response (CR) after CRT. The aim of this study was to clarify when a decision can be made to perform further treatment for a clinical CR. METHODS: We evaluated 78 patients that underwent an esophagectomy after neoadjuvant CRT in our department between 1998 and 2007. The study investigated the clinical and pathologic results of neoadjuvant CRT. RESULTS: Of the 78 cases, 19 (24.3%) were a pathologic CR (Grade 3). Pathologic CR could be estimated in only 3 of 8 clinical CR cases (37.5%). On the other hand, 12 (20.7%) of the 58 clinical partial response (PR) cases achieved pathologic CR. Likewise, 4 cases (36.4%) achieved pathologic CR among the clinical no change/progressive disease (NC/PD) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical evaluation for CRT does not reflect the pathologic effectiveness and, even if clinical CR was achieved, viable cancer cells were still present at the primary site in the majority of the population.
Authors: H Shimada; T Ochiai; S Okazumi; H Matsubara; Y Nabeya; Y Miyazawa; M Arima; Y Funami; H Hayashi; A Takeda; Y Gunji; T Suzuki; S Kobayashi Journal: Surgery Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Yoshihiro Nabeya; T Ochiai; H Matsubara; S Okazumi; T Shiratori; K Shuto; T Aoki; S Miyazaki; Y Gunji; T Uno; H Ito; H Shimada Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2005 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: H Shiozaki; M Yano; T Tsujinaka; M Inoue; S Tamura; Y Doki; T Yasuda; Y Fujiwara; M Monden Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2001 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: F Fiorica; D Di Bona; F Schepis; A Licata; L Shahied; A Venturi; A M Falchi; A Craxì; C Cammà Journal: Gut Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: E Le Prise; P L Etienne; B Meunier; G Maddern; M Ben Hassel; D Gedouin; D Boutin; J P Campion; B Launois Journal: Cancer Date: 1994-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860