PURPOSE: Endoscopic biopsy after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for esophageal cancer has been used to determine response to treatment. We wanted to determine if endoscopic biopsy can accurately establish evidence of local pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients undergoing CRT. METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database for patients seen at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center from 1996 to the present who underwent, (1) CRT for local-regionally advanced esophageal cancer, (2) post-CRT endoscopic biopsy, and (3) esophagectomy. Data points included pathology of post-CRT endoscopy and surgical specimens, tumor histology, and survival. Correlations were analyzed by the chi2 test and one-way analysis of variance. Survival comparisons were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank analysis. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-six patients were identified. Over 80% of patients received cisplatin-based chemotherapy and 5040 cGy of radiation. One hundred eighteen patients had no tumor identified on endoscopic biopsy. A negative biopsy at endoscopy was a poor predictor of pCR (negative predictive value: 31%), with 69% having local disease at esophagectomy. A positive biopsy was predictive of residual disease (positive predictive value: 95%). Negative endoscopic biopsy better predicted a pCR for squamous cell carcinomas versus adenocarcinomas (P[r] < 0.001). Nodal status of surgical specimens was not correlated with post-treatment endoscopic findings. Survival was equivalent after surgery in patients with a negative endoscopic biopsy versus patients with positive pathology. CONCLUSION: A negative endoscopic biopsy is not a useful predictor of a pCR after CRT, final nodal status, or overall survival.
PURPOSE: Endoscopic biopsy after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for esophageal cancer has been used to determine response to treatment. We wanted to determine if endoscopic biopsy can accurately establish evidence of local pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients undergoing CRT. METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database for patients seen at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center from 1996 to the present who underwent, (1) CRT for local-regionally advanced esophageal cancer, (2) post-CRT endoscopic biopsy, and (3) esophagectomy. Data points included pathology of post-CRT endoscopy and surgical specimens, tumor histology, and survival. Correlations were analyzed by the chi2 test and one-way analysis of variance. Survival comparisons were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank analysis. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-six patients were identified. Over 80% of patients received cisplatin-based chemotherapy and 5040 cGy of radiation. One hundred eighteen patients had no tumor identified on endoscopic biopsy. A negative biopsy at endoscopy was a poor predictor of pCR (negative predictive value: 31%), with 69% having local disease at esophagectomy. A positive biopsy was predictive of residual disease (positive predictive value: 95%). Negative endoscopic biopsy better predicted a pCR for squamous cell carcinomas versus adenocarcinomas (P[r] < 0.001). Nodal status of surgical specimens was not correlated with post-treatment endoscopic findings. Survival was equivalent after surgery in patients with a negative endoscopic biopsy versus patients with positive pathology. CONCLUSION: A negative endoscopic biopsy is not a useful predictor of a pCR after CRT, final nodal status, or overall survival.
Authors: Arta Monir Monjazeb; Greg Riedlinger; Mebea Aklilu; Kim R Geisinger; Girish Mishra; Scott Isom; Paige Clark; Edward A Levine; A William Blackstock Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-09-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Fatemeh G Amlashi; Xuemei Wang; Raquel E Davila; Dipen M Maru; Manoop S Bhutani; Jeffrey H Lee; Brian R Weston; Dilsa Mizrak Kaya; Maria Vassilakopoulou; Kazuto Harada; Mariela A Blum Murphy; David C Rice; Wayne L Hofstetter; Marta Davila; Quynh-Nhu Nguyen; Jaffer A Ajani Journal: Oncology Date: 2018-05-29 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Nabil P Rizk; Elliot L Servais; Laura H Tang; Camelia S Sima; Hans Gerdes; Martin Fleisher; Valerie W Rusch; Prasad S Adusumilli Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Nastaran Neishaboori; Roopma Wadhwa; Graciela M Nogueras-González; Elena Elimova; Hironori Shiozaki; Kazuki Sudo; Nikolaos Charalampakis; Adarsh Hiremath; Jeffrey H Lee; Manoop S Bhutani; Brian Weston; Mariela A Blum; Jane E Rogers; Jeana L Garris; David C Rice; Ritsuko Komaki; Stephen G Swisher; Heath D Skinner; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jaffer A Ajani Journal: Oncology Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Jonathan M Hernandez; Volkan Beylergil; Debra A Goldman; Elke van Beek; Mithat Gonen; Laura Tang; Robert Downey; Nabil Rizk; Manish Shah; Vivian Strong; Yelena Janjigian; Heiko Schöder; Daniel G Coit Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 12.969