Literature DB >> 25233363

Primary radiotherapy compared with primary surgery in cervical esophageal cancer.

Cai Neng Cao1, Jing Wei Luo1, Li Gao1, Guo Zhen Xu1, Jun Lin Yi1, Xiao Dong Huang1, Su Yan Li1, Jian Ping Xiao1, Shao Yan Liu2, Zhen Gang Xu2, Ping Zhang Tang2.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The management of cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) is controversial. The advantages of radiotherapy (RT) for CEC are lower rates of acute morbidity and mortality compared with surgery and potential for larynx preservation. The advantage of surgery is that the transposed stomach may function better over the long term than an irradiated esophagus, which tends to become stenotic over time. Which one is the primary treatment of CEC?
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate treatment outcomes of primary RT and primary surgery in patients with CEC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective study conducted in a university hospital included 224 patients treated for CEC between 2001 and 2012.
INTERVENTIONS: One hundred and sixty-one patients who received primary RT with or without subsequent surgery were assigned to the RT group, including 133 patients who received RT alone or RT with concurrent chemotherapy and 28 patients who received preoperative RT plus surgery. Sixty-three patients who received primary surgery with or without subsequent RT were assigned to the primary surgery group, including 27 patients who received surgery alone and 36 patients who received surgery plus postoperative RT. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The rates of overall 2-year local failure-free survival (FFS), regional FFS, distant FFS, and overall survival for patients undergoing primary RT and primary surgery were compared. A separate analysis using matched cases between the primary RT group and primary surgery group was conducted.
RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 15.1 months. The rates of overall 2-year local FFS, regional FFS, distant FFS, and overall survival for patients undergoing primary RT and primary surgery were 69.9% and 68.6%, 79.5% and 69.8%, 74.3% and 62.5%, 49.3% and 50.7%, respectively (P > .05 for all). Matched-case analyses did not show any significant differences in measured survival rates between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Given the similarities in rates of local FFS, regional FFS, distant FFS, and overall survival between the primary RT and primary surgery CEC treatment groups, we recommend primary RT for larynx preservation, with surgery offered subsequently for patients who do not respond to RT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25233363     DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2014.2013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 2168-6181            Impact factor:   6.223


  13 in total

Review 1.  Surveillance versus esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients with a clinical complete response after induction chemoradiation.

Authors:  Tara R Semenkovich; Bryan F Meyers
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-02

Review 2.  Update on Management of Squamous Cell Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  John K Waters; Scott I Reznik
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Oncological outcomes of cervical esophageal cancer treated primarily with surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Armando De Virgilio; Andrea Costantino; Carlo Castoro; Giuseppe Spriano; Bianca Maria Festa; Giuseppe Mercante; Davide Franceschini; Ciro Franzese; Marta Scorsetti; Andrea Marrari; Raffaele Cavina; Salvatore Marano
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 3.236

4.  Clinicopathological features and surgical treatment of cervical oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Shao-Bin Chen; Xi-Hong Yang; Hong-Rui Weng; Di-Tian Liu; Hua Li; Yu-Ping Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Outcome of proximal esophageal cancer after definitive combined chemo-radiation: a Swiss multicenter retrospective study.

Authors:  Evelyn Herrmann; Nando Mertineit; Berardino De Bari; Laura Hoeng; Francesca Caparotti; Dominic Leiser; Raphael Jumeau; Nikola Cihoric; Alexandra D Jensen; Daniel M Aebersold; Mahmut Ozsahin
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Patterns of failure and clinical outcomes of definitive radiotherapy for cervical esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Lina Zhao; Yongchun Zhou; Yunfeng Mu; Guangjin Chai; Feng Xiao; Lina Tan; Steven H Lin; Mei Shi
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-03-28

7.  Clinical results of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for 250 patients with cervical and upper thoracic esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jiaqi Zhang; Wencheng Zhang; Baozhong Zhang; Dong Qian; Xiaoxia Li; Hualei Zhang; Qi Wang; Lujun Zhao; Qingsong Pang; Ping Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 3.989

8.  Comparison between chemoselection and definitive radiotherapy in patients with cervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Yusuke Nakata; Nobuhiro Hanai; Daisuke Nishikawa; Hidenori Suzuki; Yusuke Koide; Yujiro Fukuda; Motoo Nomura; Takeshi Kodaira; Takeshi Shimizu; Yasuhisa Hasegawa
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Improving target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical oesophageal cancer using a simple optimisation method.

Authors:  Jia-Yang Lu; Michael Lok-Man Cheung; Bao-Tian Huang; Li-Li Wu; Wen-Jia Xie; Zhi-Jian Chen; De-Rui Li; Liang-Xi Xie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Long-term outcome of definitive radiotherapy for cervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Katsuyuki Sakanaka; Yuichi Ishida; Kota Fujii; Satoshi Itasaka; Shin'ichi Miyamoto; Takahiro Horimatsu; Manabu Muto; Takashi Mizowaki
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.