INTRODUCTION: This study compared survival after initial treatment with esophagectomy as primary therapy to induction therapy followed by esophagectomy for patients with clinical T2N0 (cT2N0) esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: Predictors of therapy selection for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB from 1998 to 2011 were identified with multivariable logistic regression. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Surgery was used in 42.9% (2057 of 4799) of cT2N0 patients. Of 1599 esophagectomy patients for whom treatment timing was recorded, induction therapy was used in 44.1% (688). Pretreatment staging was proven accurate in only 26.7% of patients (210 of 786) who underwent initial surgery without induction treatment and had complete pathologic data available: 41.6% (n = 327) were upstaged and 31.7% (n = 249) were downstaged. Adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy or radiation therapy) was given to 50.2% of patients treated initially with surgery who were found after resection to have nodal disease. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between strategies of primary surgery and induction therapy followed by surgery (median 41.1 versus 41.9 months, p = 0.51). In multivariable analysis, induction therapy was not independently associated with risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16, p = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Current clinical staging for early-stage esophageal cancer is highly inaccurate, with only a quarter of surgically resected cT2N0 patients found to have had accurate pretreatment staging. Induction therapy for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB is not associated with improved survival.
INTRODUCTION: This study compared survival after initial treatment with esophagectomy as primary therapy to induction therapy followed by esophagectomy for patients with clinical T2N0 (cT2N0) esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: Predictors of therapy selection for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB from 1998 to 2011 were identified with multivariable logistic regression. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Surgery was used in 42.9% (2057 of 4799) of cT2N0 patients. Of 1599 esophagectomy patients for whom treatment timing was recorded, induction therapy was used in 44.1% (688). Pretreatment staging was proven accurate in only 26.7% of patients (210 of 786) who underwent initial surgery without induction treatment and had complete pathologic data available: 41.6% (n = 327) were upstaged and 31.7% (n = 249) were downstaged. Adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy or radiation therapy) was given to 50.2% of patients treated initially with surgery who were found after resection to have nodal disease. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between strategies of primary surgery and induction therapy followed by surgery (median 41.1 versus 41.9 months, p = 0.51). In multivariable analysis, induction therapy was not independently associated with risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16, p = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Current clinical staging for early-stage esophageal cancer is highly inaccurate, with only a quarter of surgically resected cT2N0 patients found to have had accurate pretreatment staging. Induction therapy for patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer in the NCDB is not associated with improved survival.
Authors: Thomas W Rice; David P Mason; Sudish C Murthy; Gregory Zuccaro; David J Adelstein; Lisa A Rybicki; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2007-01-09 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Panteleimon Kountourakis; Arlene M Correa; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jeffrey H Lee; Manoop S Bhutani; David C Rice; Ritsuko Komaki; Dipen M Maru; William A Ross; Ara Vaporciyan; Stephen G Swisher; Jaffer A Ajani Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; Maurits J Wiersema; Jonathan E Clain; Ian D Norton; Michael J Levy; Yvonne Romero; Diva Salomao; Ross Dierkhising; Alan R Zinsmeister Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: A Kutup; B-C Link; P G Schurr; T Strate; J T Kaifi; M Bubenheim; S Seewald; E F Yekebas; N Soehendra; J R Izbicki Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Traves D Crabtree; Andrzej S Kosinski; Varun Puri; William Burfeind; Ankit Bharat; G Alexander Patterson; Wayne Hofstetter; Bryan F Meyers Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Cameron D Wright; John C Kucharczuk; Sean M O'Brien; Joshua D Grab; Mark S Allen Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Nabil P Rizk; Hemant Ishwaran; Thomas W Rice; Long-Qi Chen; Paul H Schipper; Kenneth A Kesler; Simon Law; Toni E M R Lerut; Carolyn E Reed; Jarmo A Salo; Walter J Scott; Wayne L Hofstetter; Thomas J Watson; Mark S Allen; Valerie W Rusch; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Arianna Barbetta; Francisco Schlottmann; Tamar Nobel; David B Sewell; Meier Hsu; Kay See Tan; Hans Gerdes; Pari Shah; Manjit S Bains; Matthew Bott; James M Isbell; David R Jones; Daniela Molena Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Tara R Semenkovich; Roheena Z Panni; Jessica L Hudson; Theodore Thomas; Leisha C Elmore; Su-Hsin Chang; Bryan F Meyers; Benjamin D Kozower; Varun Puri Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: William M Whited; Jaimin R Trivedi; Emily R Bond; Victor H van Berkel; Matthew P Fox Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 3.452