Literature DB >> 25031273

Treatment trends, risk of lymph node metastasis, and outcomes for localized esophageal cancer.

Ryan P Merkow1, Karl Y Bilimoria2, Rajesh N Keswani2, Jeanette Chung2, Karen L Sherman2, Lawrence M Knab2, Mitchell C Posner2, David J Bentrem2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection is increasingly used to treat localized, early-stage esophageal cancer. We sought to assess its adoption, characterize the risks of nodal metastases, and define differences in procedural mortality and 5-year survival between endoscopic and surgical resection in the United States.
METHODS: From the National Cancer Data Base, patients with T1a and T1b lesions were identified. Treatment patterns were characterized, and hierarchical regression methods were used to define predictors and evaluate outcomes. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Five thousand three hundred ninety patients were identified and underwent endoscopic (26.5%) or surgical resection (73.5%). Endoscopic resection increased from 19.0% to 53.0% for T1a lesions (P < .001) and from 6.6% to 20.9% for T1b cancers (P < .001). The strongest predictors of endoscopic resection were depth of invasion (T1a vs T1b: odds ratio [OR] = 4.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.76 to 5.27) and patient age of 75 years or older (vs age less than 55 years: OR = 4.86; 95% CI = 3.60 to 6.57). Among patients undergoing surgery, lymph node metastasis was 5.0% for T1a and 16.6% for T1b lesions. Predictors of nodal metastases included tumor size greater than 2 cm (vs. <2 cm) and intermediate-/high-grade lesions (vs low grade). For example, 0.5% of patients with low-grade T1a lesions less than 2 cm had lymph node involvement. The risk of 30-day mortality was less after endoscopic resection (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.58) but greater for conditional 5-year survival (HR = 1.63; 95% CI = 1.07 to 2.47).
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection has become the most common treatment of T1a esophageal cancer and has increased for T1b cancers. It remains important to balance the risk of nodal metastases and procedural risk when counseling patients regarding their treatment options.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25031273     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju133

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  47 in total

1.  Negative lymph node at station 108 is a strong predictor of overall survival in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jinling Zhang; Xueyuan Heng; Yi Luo; Luning Li; Haiyan Zhang; Fengyuan Che; Baosheng Li
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 2.  Oesophageal cancer in 2014: Advances in curatively intended treatment.

Authors:  Jesper Lagergren
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 46.802

3.  CT radiomics nomogram for the preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer.

Authors:  Yue Wang; Wei Liu; Yang Yu; Jing-Juan Liu; Hua-Dan Xue; Ya-Fei Qi; Jing Lei; Jian-Chun Yu; Zheng-Yu Jin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Infiltration Depth is the Most Relevant Risk Factor for Overall Metastases in Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Christina Oetzmann von Sochaczewski; Thomas Haist; Michael Pauthner; Markus Mann; Susanne Braun; Christian Ell; Dietmar Lorenz
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  A Model Based on Pathologic Features of Superficial Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Complements Clinical Node Staging in Determining Risk of Metastasis to Lymph Nodes.

Authors:  Jon M Davison; Michael S Landau; James D Luketich; Kevin M McGrath; Tyler J Foxwell; Douglas P Landsittel; Michael K Gibson; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 11.382

6.  Does delayed esophagectomy after endoscopic resection affect outcomes in patients with stage T1 esophageal cancer? A propensity score-based analysis.

Authors:  Shengfei Wang; Yangle Huang; Juntao Xie; Lingdun Zhuge; Longlong Shao; Jiaqing Xiang; Yawei Zhang; Yihua Sun; Hong Hu; Sufeng Chen; Toni Lerut; James D Luketich; Jie Zhang; Haiquan Chen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Evolution in the Treatment of Esophageal Disease at a Single Academic Institution: 2004-2013.

Authors:  James P Dolan; Patrick J McLaren; Brian S Diggs; Paul H Schipper; Brandon H Tieu; Brett C Sheppard; Erin W Gilbert; Molly A Conroy; John G Hunter
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 1.878

Review 8.  Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in esophageal cancer staging.

Authors:  Timothy Krill; Michelle Baliss; Russel Roark; Michael Sydor; Ronald Samuel; Jenine Zaibaq; Praveen Guturu; Sreeram Parupudi
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  The effect of age on survival after endoscopic resection versus surgery for T1a esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Vignesh Raman; Oliver K Jawitz; Soraya L Voigt; Chi-Fu J Yang; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico; Matthew G Hartwig
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 10.  Treatment of esophagogastric junction carcinoma: an unsolved debate.

Authors:  Michele Orditura; Gennaro Galizia; Eva Lieto; Ferdinando De Vita; Fortunato Ciardiello
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.