PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective multicenter study was performed in 180 patients with MCC treated between February 1988 and September 2009. Patients who had had surgery alone were compared with patients who received surgery and postoperative RT or radical RT. Local relapse-free survival (LRFS), regional relapse-free survival (RRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were assessed together with disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) rates. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were male and 101 patients were female, and the median age was 73 years old (range, 38-93 years). The majority of patients had localized disease (n = 146), and the remaining patients had regional lymph node metastasis (n = 34). Forty-nine patients underwent surgery for the primary tumor without postoperative RT to the primary site; the other 131 patients received surgery for the primary tumor, followed by postoperative RT (n = 118) or a biopsy of the primary tumor followed by radical RT (n = 13). Median follow-up was 5 years (range, 0.2-16.5 years). Patients in the RT group had improved LRFS (93% vs. 64%; p < 0.001), RRFS (76% vs. 27%; p < 0.001), DMFS (70% vs. 42%; p = 0.01), DFS (59% vs. 4%; p < 0.001), and CSS (65% vs. 49%; p = 0.03) rates compared to patients who underwent surgery for the primary tumor alone; LRFS, RRFS, DMFS, and DFS rates remained significant with multivariable Cox regression analysis. However OS was not significantly improved by postoperative RT (56% vs. 46%; p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: After multivariable analysis, postoperative RT was associated with improved outcome and seems to be an important component in the multimodality treatment of MCC.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective multicenter study was performed in 180 patients with MCC treated between February 1988 and September 2009. Patients who had had surgery alone were compared with patients who received surgery and postoperative RT or radical RT. Local relapse-free survival (LRFS), regional relapse-free survival (RRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were assessed together with disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) rates. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were male and 101 patients were female, and the median age was 73 years old (range, 38-93 years). The majority of patients had localized disease (n = 146), and the remaining patients had regional lymph node metastasis (n = 34). Forty-nine patients underwent surgery for the primary tumor without postoperative RT to the primary site; the other 131 patients received surgery for the primary tumor, followed by postoperative RT (n = 118) or a biopsy of the primary tumor followed by radical RT (n = 13). Median follow-up was 5 years (range, 0.2-16.5 years). Patients in the RT group had improved LRFS (93% vs. 64%; p < 0.001), RRFS (76% vs. 27%; p < 0.001), DMFS (70% vs. 42%; p = 0.01), DFS (59% vs. 4%; p < 0.001), and CSS (65% vs. 49%; p = 0.03) rates compared to patients who underwent surgery for the primary tumor alone; LRFS, RRFS, DMFS, and DFS rates remained significant with multivariable Cox regression analysis. However OS was not significantly improved by postoperative RT (56% vs. 46%; p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: After multivariable analysis, postoperative RT was associated with improved outcome and seems to be an important component in the multimodality treatment of MCC.
Authors: Yezaz A Ghouri; Somashekar G Krishna; Uma R Kundu; Manoop S Bhutani; Manoop S Butani; Jeffrey H Lee; William A Ross Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Matthew C Perez; Daniel E Oliver; Evan S Weitman; David Boulware; Jane L Messina; Javier Torres-Roca; C Wayne Cruse; Ricardo J Gonzalez; Amod A Sarnaik; Vernon K Sondak; Evan J Wuthrick; Louis B Harrison; Jonathan S Zager Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-10-11 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Matthew C Perez; Felipe R de Pinho; Amanda Holstein; Daniel E Oliver; Syeda M H Naqvi; Youngchul Kim; Jane L Messina; Erin Burke; Ricardo J Gonzalez; Amod A Sarnaik; C Wayne Cruse; Evan J Wuthrick; Louis B Harrison; Vernon K Sondak; Jonathan S Zager Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Maryam M Asgari; Monica M Sokil; E Margaret Warton; Jayasri Iyer; Kelly G Paulson; Paul Nghiem Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Christopher K Bichakjian; Thomas Olencki; Sumaira Z Aasi; Murad Alam; James S Andersen; Rachel Blitzblau; Glen M Bowen; Carlo M Contreras; Gregory A Daniels; Roy Decker; Jeffrey M Farma; Kris Fisher; Brian Gastman; Karthik Ghosh; Roy C Grekin; Kenneth Grossman; Alan L Ho; Karl D Lewis; Manisha Loss; Daniel D Lydiatt; Jane Messina; Kishwer S Nehal; Paul Nghiem; Igor Puzanov; Chrysalyne D Schmults; Ashok R Shaha; Valencia Thomas; Yaohui G Xu; John A Zic; Karin G Hoffmann; Anita M Engh Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 12.693
Authors: Yun Song; Feredun S Azari; Rebecca Tang; Adrienne B Shannon; John T Miura; Douglas L Fraker; Giorgos C Karakousis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-05-13 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Daniele Rossini; Salvatore Caponnetto; Vittoria Lapadula; Lucilla De Filippis; Gabriella Del Bene; Alessandra Emiliani; Flavia Longo Journal: Case Rep Oncol Med Date: 2013-09-01