BACKGROUND: Esophageal adenocarcinoma is often associated with obesity, and a 5 Kg m(-2) increase in body mass index (BMI) has, in fact, been found to be strongly associated with the risk of this type of cancer (RR, 1.52; p < 0.0001). Esophagectomy with lymphoadenectomy is the mainstay of therapy for these patients. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the surgical and oncological outcomes as well as the survival rates of underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese patients following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data relative to 1,127 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma presenting at a specialized tertiary hospital (the Center of Esophageal Diseases for the Veneto Region) between 2000 and 2008 were prospectively collected. The 278 subjects whose BMI values before disease onset were available and underwent esophagectomy were enrolled in the study. Sixty-one of the 278 patients were classified as obese (BMI >30), 121 were classified as overweight (BMI, 25-29.9), 81 were classified as normal weight (BMI <24.9), and 15 ones as underweight (BMI <20). The outcome and survival of the four groups were compared. Frequency and survival analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The rate of R0 esophagectomy and the incidence of toxicity during neoadjuvant chemotherapy were similar in the four groups. Respiratory complications after R0 esophagectomy seemed to be more frequent in the underweight and normal-weight patients group (p < 0.01). Moreover, underweight patients had a significantly higher rate of septic, cardiovascular, and metabolic postoperative complications. The 121 overweight patients had a better overall survival rate compared to normal weight and obese patients (p = 0.05). This difference was not significant if patients were stratified in stages I or II or stages III or IV. CONCLUSION: Overweight patients seem to respond better to esophageal cancer and esophagectomy with respect to normal-weight ones. This data seem to suggest that in spite of several unfavorable features, a moderate increase of weight may be helpful to survive after esophagectomy for cancer.
BACKGROUND:Esophageal adenocarcinoma is often associated with obesity, and a 5 Kg m(-2) increase in body mass index (BMI) has, in fact, been found to be strongly associated with the risk of this type of cancer (RR, 1.52; p < 0.0001). Esophagectomy with lymphoadenectomy is the mainstay of therapy for these patients. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the surgical and oncological outcomes as well as the survival rates of underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obesepatients following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data relative to 1,127 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma presenting at a specialized tertiary hospital (the Center of Esophageal Diseases for the Veneto Region) between 2000 and 2008 were prospectively collected. The 278 subjects whose BMI values before disease onset were available and underwent esophagectomy were enrolled in the study. Sixty-one of the 278 patients were classified as obese (BMI >30), 121 were classified as overweight (BMI, 25-29.9), 81 were classified as normal weight (BMI <24.9), and 15 ones as underweight (BMI <20). The outcome and survival of the four groups were compared. Frequency and survival analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The rate of R0 esophagectomy and the incidence of toxicity during neoadjuvant chemotherapy were similar in the four groups. Respiratory complications after R0 esophagectomy seemed to be more frequent in the underweight and normal-weight patients group (p < 0.01). Moreover, underweight patients had a significantly higher rate of septic, cardiovascular, and metabolic postoperative complications. The 121 overweight patients had a better overall survival rate compared to normal weight and obesepatients (p = 0.05). This difference was not significant if patients were stratified in stages I or II or stages III or IV. CONCLUSION: Overweight patients seem to respond better to esophageal cancer and esophagectomy with respect to normal-weight ones. This data seem to suggest that in spite of several unfavorable features, a moderate increase of weight may be helpful to survive after esophagectomy for cancer.
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christian C Abnet; Neal D Freedman; Albert R Hollenbeck; Joseph F Fraumeni; Michael Leitzmann; Arthur Schatzkin Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2008-01-24 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: B A Grotenhuis; B P L Wijnhoven; G J Hötte; E P van der Stok; H W Tilanus; J J B van Lanschot Journal: World J Surg Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Marco Scarpa; Francesco Cavallin; Giulia Noaro; Eleonora Pinto; Rita Alfieri; Matteo Cagol; Carlo Castoro Journal: Chin J Cancer Res Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: S Shen; J L Araujo; N K Altorki; J R Sonett; A Rodriguez; K Sungur-Stasik; C F Spinelli; A I Neugut; J A Abrams Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: S S Zhang; H Yang; K J Luo; Q Y Huang; J Y Chen; F Yang; X L Cai; X Xie; Q W Liu; A E Bella; R G Hu; J Wen; Y Hu; J H Fu Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Elizabeth A Loehrer; Edward L Giovannucci; Rebecca A Betensky; Andrea Shafer; David C Christiani Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-03-23 Impact factor: 4.452