PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT) with capecitabine and cisplatin for elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS: A total of 75 patients elder than 65 years with histologically proven stage II-III ESCC were enrolled, in whom 40 patients were treated with CCRT consisted of two cycles of intravenous cisplatin and oral capecitabine during and after radiotherapy and 35 patients were treated with SCRT as two cycles of capecitabine plus cisplatin before and after radiotherapy. Response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival and toxicity were compared. RESULTS: The overall response rate (CR + PR) in the CCRT group (91.6 %) was significantly higher than that in the SCRT group (67.7 %), P = 0.023. The median PFS and median OS were significantly higher in CCRT group (19.7 and 33.6 months) than those in SCRT group (11.6 and 15.7 months), P < 0.05. The acute toxic effect was more severe in the CCRT group than in the SCRT group, but the grade 3-4 acute toxicities were similar in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: It suggested that both CCRT and SCRT with capecitabine and cisplatin are tolerable and effective for elderly patients with locally advanced ESCC. Concurrent CRT might be superior to SCRT.
PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT) with capecitabine and cisplatin for elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS: A total of 75 patients elder than 65 years with histologically proven stage II-III ESCC were enrolled, in whom 40 patients were treated with CCRT consisted of two cycles of intravenous cisplatin and oral capecitabine during and after radiotherapy and 35 patients were treated with SCRT as two cycles of capecitabine plus cisplatin before and after radiotherapy. Response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival and toxicity were compared. RESULTS: The overall response rate (CR + PR) in the CCRT group (91.6 %) was significantly higher than that in the SCRT group (67.7 %), P = 0.023. The median PFS and median OS were significantly higher in CCRT group (19.7 and 33.6 months) than those in SCRT group (11.6 and 15.7 months), P < 0.05. The acute toxic effect was more severe in the CCRT group than in the SCRT group, but the grade 3-4 acute toxicities were similar in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: It suggested that both CCRT and SCRT with capecitabine and cisplatin are tolerable and effective for elderly patients with locally advanced ESCC. Concurrent CRT might be superior to SCRT.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mohan Suntharalingam; Jennifer Moughan; Lawrence R Coia; Mark J Krasna; Lisa Kachnic; Daniel G Haller; Christopher G Willet; Madhu J John; Bruce D Minsky; Jean B Owen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M al-Sarraf; K Martz; A Herskovic; L Leichman; J S Brindle; V K Vaitkevicius; J Cooper; R Byhardt; L Davis; B Emami Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Grace L Smith; Benjamin D Smith; Thomas A Buchholz; Zhongxing Liao; Melenda Jeter; Stephen G Swisher; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jaffer A Ajani; Mary F McAleer; Ritsuko Komaki; James D Cox Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-03-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J G Kim; S K Sohn; D H Kim; J H Baek; S B Jeon; Y S Chae; K B Lee; J S Park; J H Sohn; J C Kim; I K Park Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2005-11-14 Impact factor: 7.640