Literature DB >> 23504143

Which is the optimal response criteria for evaluating preoperative treatment in esophageal cancer: RECIST or histology?

Yukinori Kurokawa1, Taro Shibata, Nobutoshi Ando, Shiko Seki, Hidenori Mukaida, Haruhiko Fukuda.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preoperative treatment is a promising strategy for improving long-term outcomes in advanced esophageal cancer. Two tumor response evaluation criteria for preoperative treatment are available: response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) and histological criteria. This prospective study aimed to identify which was a better surrogate end point for survival in the preoperative setting.
METHODS: We analyzed all eligible patients (n=164) from the preoperative treatment group in a phase III trial comparing preoperative versus postoperative 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin for clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer. Intercriteria reliability was evaluated with the proportion of agreement and the kappa coefficient. For validity analyses, hazard ratios (HR) of response to nonresponse and differences in response rates between short- and long-term survivors were evaluated.
RESULTS: The clinical and histological response rates were 37.8% (62 of 164) and 20.1% (33 of 164), respectively. The proportion of agreement for response to nonresponse between the 2 criteria was 70.3%, and the kappa coefficient was 0.34. The HR for death in patients with histological response (0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.55, P<0.001) was lower than for those with RECIST response (0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.91, P=0.018). The difference in response rates between short- and long-term survivors according to histological criteria (27 vs. 7%, P<0.001) was larger than with RECIST (42 vs. 30%, P=0.13).
CONCLUSIONS: Intercriteria agreement was relatively low, and histological criteria yielded more valid assessments of response than RECIST. Histological response rate seemed to be the better surrogate end point of survival in the preoperative setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23504143     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-2946-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  10 in total

1.  Validity of response assessment criteria in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer (JCOG0507-A).

Authors:  Yukinori Kurokawa; Taro Shibata; Mitsuru Sasako; Takeshi Sano; Akira Tsuburaya; Yoshiaki Iwasaki; Haruhiko Fukuda
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 7.370

2.  Quantifying local tumor morphological changes with Jacobian map for prediction of pathologic tumor response to chemo-radiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Sadegh Riyahi; Wookjin Choi; Chia-Ju Liu; Hualiang Zhong; Abraham J Wu; James G Mechalakos; Wei Lu
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  The association between four SNPs of X-ray repair cross complementing protein 1 and the sensitivity to radiotherapy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Yaohong Zhang; Zhaoyun Luo; Liye Yang; Senming Chen; Chuzhi Chen; Zhixiong Lin
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 2.967

4.  Chemoradiotherapy response in recurrent rectal cancer.

Authors:  Stanley K T Yu; Aneel Bhangu; Diana M Tait; Paris Tekkis; Andrew Wotherspoon; Gina Brown
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 4.452

5.  Short-term clinical effect of conformal radiotherapy combined with tegafur gimeracil oteracil potassium in treating recurrent esophagus cancer.

Authors:  Yuyan Jiao; Yuzhen Shen; Hua Yan; Yan Liu; Haihua Tan; Jianzhe Li
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.088

6.  Potential of extravasated platelet aggregation as a surrogate marker for overall survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with preoperative docetaxel, cisplatin and S-1: a retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Hiroto Saito; Sachio Fushida; Tomoharu Miyashita; Katsunobu Oyama; Takahisa Yamaguchi; Tomoya Tsukada; Jun Kinoshita; Hidehiro Tajima; Itasu Ninomiya; Tetsuo Ohta
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Pathological response and serum VEGF changes during chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Jing-Ping Yu; Xin-Chu Ni; Zhi-Qiang Sun; Wei Sun; Bin Nie; Su-Ping Sun; Jian-Lin Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 8.  Relevant issues in tumor regression grading of histopathological response to neoadjuvant treatment in adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Authors:  F Klevebro; A Tsekrekos; D Low; L Lundell; M Vieth; S Detlefsen
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 3.429

9.  Oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: histogram-derived ADC parameters are not predictive of tumour response to chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Maiko Kozumi; Hideki Ota; Takaya Yamamoto; Rei Umezawa; Haruo Matsushita; Yojiro Ishikawa; Noriyoshi Takahashi; Tomonori Matsuura; Kei Takase; Keiichi Jingu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Influence of preoperative chemotherapy-induced leukopenia on survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: exploratory analysis of JCOG9907.

Authors:  Hiroki Hara; Junki Mizusawa; Shuichi Hironaka; Ken Kato; Hiroyuki Daiko; Tetsuya Abe; Kenichi Nakamura; Nobutoshi Ando; Yuko Kitagawa
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 4.230

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.