INTRODUCTION: The majority of esophageal cancer is either adenocarcinoma (ACA) or squamous cell carcinoma (SCCA). Recent randomized trials suggest that definitive chemoradiotherapy may be equally effective as surgery. However, the responsiveness of ACA versus SCCA to radiotherapy (RT) has never been compared. This Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry analysis investigates whether survival differed between ACA and SCCA based on the treatment modality. METHODS: Patients with T2-4N0 or N+ SCCA and ACA in the cervical or thoracic esophagus diagnosed from 1983 to 2004 were obtained from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database. Patients with multiple primary cancers, underwent a surgical procedure other than partial or total esophagectomy, had metastatic or T1N0 disease, or received RT that did not include external beam radiation were excluded. Patients were grouped according to treatment received: RT alone, preoperative RT, any surgery (regardless of use of RT), and surgery alone. RESULTS: A total of 4752 patients were included, 2680 (56%) had ACA and 2072 (44%) had SCCA. After adjusting for age, marital status, cost of living, and race, the overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival was similar for all treatment groups except the RT-alone group where OS and SCC were superior for ACA. However, no difference in 3- and 5-year OS and cause-specific survival rates for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in survival was seen between patients with ACA and SCCA across any of the major treatment modalities for esophageal cancer, suggesting that both histologies respond to treatment similarly.
INTRODUCTION: The majority of esophageal cancer is either adenocarcinoma (ACA) or squamous cell carcinoma (SCCA). Recent randomized trials suggest that definitive chemoradiotherapy may be equally effective as surgery. However, the responsiveness of ACA versus SCCA to radiotherapy (RT) has never been compared. This Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry analysis investigates whether survival differed between ACA and SCCA based on the treatment modality. METHODS:Patients with T2-4N0 or N+ SCCA and ACA in the cervical or thoracic esophagus diagnosed from 1983 to 2004 were obtained from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database. Patients with multiple primary cancers, underwent a surgical procedure other than partial or total esophagectomy, had metastatic or T1N0 disease, or received RT that did not include external beam radiation were excluded. Patients were grouped according to treatment received: RT alone, preoperative RT, any surgery (regardless of use of RT), and surgery alone. RESULTS: A total of 4752 patients were included, 2680 (56%) had ACA and 2072 (44%) had SCCA. After adjusting for age, marital status, cost of living, and race, the overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival was similar for all treatment groups except the RT-alone group where OS and SCC were superior for ACA. However, no difference in 3- and 5-year OS and cause-specific survival rates for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in survival was seen between patients with ACA and SCCA across any of the major treatment modalities for esophageal cancer, suggesting that both histologies respond to treatment similarly.
Authors: Mathias Worni; Jeremiah Martin; Beat Gloor; Ricardo Pietrobon; Thomas A D'Amico; Igor Akushevich; Mark F Berry Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Maria C Wolf; Michael Stahl; Bernd J Krause; Luigi Bonavina; Christiane Bruns; Claus Belka; Franz Zehentmayr Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 3.481